Sci-Fi Channel Original Garbage
Added 10/20/2009
Watch Video Here: http://www.amazon.com/review/R1G7WVW3SX1F5P
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Not Even "So-Bad-So-Good"
Added 10/17/2009
Admittedly the first "Anaconda" was not a masterpiece, but it was still fun. Well, it was campy fun, to be exact, with the snake hunter Jon Voight and his (intentionally, I guess) hammy acting that made the 1997 film an instant classic of the "so-bad-so-good" films. Sorry, but "Anaconda III" is no fun.
In the third "Anaconda" David Hasselhoff plays a mercenary leading his snake hunting team. John Rhys-Davies appears as billionaire spending lots of money on some questionable experiments. Crystal Allen is a scientist who warns ... well, in short, the story is nothing special. Two anacondas escape from the facilities and eat people. That's it. But the list of the actors is at least interesting and their acting is OK.
The role of David Hasselhoff is not very big. He is the star of the film, but only in the second half and after the opening where he briefly appears, you have to wait for him to show up quite long.
I don't expect much from the straight-to-DVD film, but the special effects are so cheesy. Still some may find these cheap effects mildly amusing, like one silly decapitation scene that results in exploding of a vehicle. Maybe they should have done more of it and the film would have been much less boring.
Some of the stars of the third "Anaconda" film will be back in "Anaconda 4: Trail of Blood." Just in case if you are interested.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Hasselhoff vs. Mutated Anaconda's=A Gory Thrill Ride, Brought To You By the SciFi Channel
Added 5/1/2009
Anaconda 3: Offspring Movie Review
Grade: A-
Offspring had been constantly checked out at my local video rental store, simply due to the popularity of it, and I waited a long time to finally have a chance to rent it, (I missed the SciFi channel airing) before someone else came and got it. Yes, I know a movie with the words SciFi channel, David Hasselhoff, and mutated Anacondas sounds like the worst movie ever, but trust me, it was well worth the wait at the video store.
I don't really understand all the negative reviews here, and I know I'm like a fish swimming the wrong way from the school, but this truly is a fun, entertaining movie. The title of my review is basically the entire plot, in all its extremely gory glory. (The movie gets really graphic at times, with the snake stabbing people, throwing up animals, and biting off heads...)
But of course, since it's a SciFi channel movie, it definitely has its flaws. The CGI is just terrible; the snakes looking like something out of a rejected horror video game. At the end of the movie, it seems like the director ran out of CGI money, and the baby snakes at the end are simply a type of Corn snake, and don't even look remotely like baby anacondas. But the rest of the special effects money seemed to be spent pretty well; there are great explosions galore littered throughout the movie.
As for the acting: kind of forced, like the actors were trying to hard, but better than typical SciFi fare. David Hasselhoff actually isn't too bad...key words being "too bad"...
So if you want to spend your Saturday night like I did watching this movie, go ahead: after all, what better way of spending a Saturday night do have other than watching giant snakes attack David Hasselhoff?
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Sci-fi disasterpiece.
Added 2/14/2009
Seriously, anyone that thinks this hunk of garbage is even a decent movie has the lowest standards on the planet! The first Anaconda was the only good one. It had everything, decent cast, great acting(mostly Jon Voight), perfect setting, awesome aninatronics, and the snake actually looked like a real Green Anaconda! Not to mention suspense which The Hunt For Blood Orchid and this low budget butt leakage sorely lacks.
If you're going to call a movie "Anaconda" and it's supposed to be about a giant ANACONDA eating people, doesn't it make sense to have the snake look like an ANACONDA?! Even with CGI, they still can't make a decent snake! The ones in the second film looked almost like really big elapids(cobras, mambas, etc), and the ones in this movie look like freakin' vipers! I swear I saw one scene in which the snake actually had fangs!
And not only that, but this film is a rip-off of the Python movies, which are rip-offs of the first Anaconda! The snake is genetically modified instead of being a natural animal, the snake is oddly intelligent, it stares down its prey like it recognizes them, and it impales people with its tail more often than it constricts them. ALL of these are staples of the Python movies.
The only decent actor in this entire film was David Hasselhoff, and that should tell you everything you need to know about this film.
Characters suck, effects suck, CGI sucks, snakes suck, weapons suck, cast sucks, acting sucks, and the plot sucks. Add all this up and you get another Sci-fi channel original suckfest that's not original at all. Really, how sad is it when a movie has to rip-off movies that are already rip-offs? Well, it gets a lot sadder when the rip-off of the rip-offs is the next installment of the series that started the whole damn thing!
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
NOT HORRIBLE BUT NOT NOTEWORTHY
Added 12/22/2008
ANACONDA 3
THE OFFSPRING
Remember when J-Lo, Jon Voight and Ice Cube were battling a giant Anaconda, or when another group led by a J-Lo look a like did the same thing but against more, yeah those were the days. Well it seems that those days of a big budget [at least compared to this] theatrical released Anaconda movie are gone. But being that I am a fan of any and everything low budget I decided that I would give this a try, I bought it in order to have the whole collection. But that aside I still went into this knowing that it was a Sci-Fi Channel movie, so I knew it was probably not a classic.
I try to stay positive in most of my reviews because I know how much work went it these types of things but it is hard to get past the look of this film. Don't get me wrong there is nothing wrong with a low budget movie but compared to the first two it is hard to ignore. I would say that this looks a lot like "Lake Placid 2" so if you have seen that film you know what I am talking about, although that film may look better than this one. Another thing that gets me is the look of the snakes, I know this is a low budget film but the snakes from "Python" and "Boa" look better then these. On the plus side for a film like this it was shot pretty well thanks to Don E. FauntLeRoy that may be one of the few pluses to how the film looks.
I hate to say things like this but another thing that drags this film down a little is the script by David C. Olson and Nicholas Davidoff. It may not be the worst thing ever written but it still has its flaws, the story line in particular seems like every other creature running amuck type flick. The film is about a secret laboratory [can you see where this is going?] were tests are being done on over sized snakes, in fact it is the test drug that is making the snakes so big apparently. Well as if you did not know the snakes break loose and are out and about looking for some food. In comes the "professionals" that are called in to take care of this little problem. I know what you are thinking it sounds a lot like every other b creature feature, well you are right. I can't believe that a franchise that was based somewhat in reality has now become this. Director Don E. FauntLeRoy seems to do what he can with the script as the pace of the film moves along nicely and for the most part for this type of film the direction seems good. But the performances needed a little more work.
David Hasselhoff [yes that one] is actually pretty good in this film and makes for a believable snake hunter, especially towards the end his performance gets real good. John Rhys-Davies does a good job as expected for the short time he is in the film, as does the guy who plays Davis's right hand man who goes on the hunt with them. But other then those few everyone else ranges from average to just plain bad, are as disappointed as me? I really wanted this movie to be more then it was but I guess I have to settle with what I got. To be honest this film is not horrible it is just nothing note worthy, buy it if you want the collection but remember that a forth film in the series is coming.
2 out of 2 people found this helpful.
|
Sci-Fi Channel Original Garbage
Added 10/20/2009
Watch Video Here: http://www.amazon.com/review/R1G7WVW3SX1F5P
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Not Even "So-Bad-So-Good"
Added 10/17/2009
Admittedly the first "Anaconda" was not a masterpiece, but it was still fun. Well, it was campy fun, to be exact, with the snake hunter Jon Voight and his (intentionally, I guess) hammy acting that made the 1997 film an instant classic of the "so-bad-so-good" films. Sorry, but "Anaconda III" is no fun.
In the third "Anaconda" David Hasselhoff plays a mercenary leading his snake hunting team. John Rhys-Davies appears as billionaire spending lots of money on some questionable experiments. Crystal Allen is a scientist who warns ... well, in short, the story is nothing special. Two anacondas escape from the facilities and eat people. That's it. But the list of the actors is at least interesting and their acting is OK.
The role of David Hasselhoff is not very big. He is the star of the film, but only in the second half and after the opening where he briefly appears, you have to wait for him to show up quite long.
I don't expect much from the straight-to-DVD film, but the special effects are so cheesy. Still some may find these cheap effects mildly amusing, like one silly decapitation scene that results in exploding of a vehicle. Maybe they should have done more of it and the film would have been much less boring.
Some of the stars of the third "Anaconda" film will be back in "Anaconda 4: Trail of Blood." Just in case if you are interested.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Hasselhoff vs. Mutated Anaconda's=A Gory Thrill Ride, Brought To You By the SciFi Channel
Added 5/1/2009
Anaconda 3: Offspring Movie Review
Grade: A-
Offspring had been constantly checked out at my local video rental store, simply due to the popularity of it, and I waited a long time to finally have a chance to rent it, (I missed the SciFi channel airing) before someone else came and got it. Yes, I know a movie with the words SciFi channel, David Hasselhoff, and mutated Anacondas sounds like the worst movie ever, but trust me, it was well worth the wait at the video store.
I don't really understand all the negative reviews here, and I know I'm like a fish swimming the wrong way from the school, but this truly is a fun, entertaining movie. The title of my review is basically the entire plot, in all its extremely gory glory. (The movie gets really graphic at times, with the snake stabbing people, throwing up animals, and biting off heads...)
But of course, since it's a SciFi channel movie, it definitely has its flaws. The CGI is just terrible; the snakes looking like something out of a rejected horror video game. At the end of the movie, it seems like the director ran out of CGI money, and the baby snakes at the end are simply a type of Corn snake, and don't even look remotely like baby anacondas. But the rest of the special effects money seemed to be spent pretty well; there are great explosions galore littered throughout the movie.
As for the acting: kind of forced, like the actors were trying to hard, but better than typical SciFi fare. David Hasselhoff actually isn't too bad...key words being "too bad"...
So if you want to spend your Saturday night like I did watching this movie, go ahead: after all, what better way of spending a Saturday night do have other than watching giant snakes attack David Hasselhoff?
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
