A reboot that knows the joke — but forgets to land it
There’s something oddly fitting about Anaconda coming back in 2025. A film that was unintentionally funny the first time around has now been revived as a self-aware satire about Hollywood’s obsession with recycling IP. On paper, it sounds clever. In execution, it mostly feels like a snake endlessly circling itself.
Sony’s 1997 Anaconda — starring Jennifer Lopez, Ice Cube, and an overworked animatronic snake — was meant to be horror but became a cult laugh-fest thanks to wooden dialogue and baffling character choices. So when director Tommy Gormican (The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent) took on the reboot, the big question was simple: play it straight or lean into the absurdity?
Gormican chooses the latter — and then hesitates.
The concept: Meta, messy, and oddly cautious
This new Anaconda isn’t just a reboot. It’s a reboot-about-a-reboot-about-a-reboot. Written by Gormican and Kevin Etten, the film openly debates whether it’s a remake, a reimagining, or a “spiritual sequel,” before deciding it’s all three.
The story follows a group of washed-up friends who once made a DIY monster movie as kids. Decades later, they reunite to relaunch Anaconda by shooting a new version in Brazil — only to run into an actual giant snake.
It’s a solid setup. A genuinely smart one. The problem is that the film never commits fully to being funny, scary, or savage.
Cast & characters: Great actors, muted chemistry
The ensemble is stacked:
- Paul Rudd plays Griff, a struggling actor stuck in forgettable TV roles
- Jack Black is Doug, a frustrated creative shooting wedding videos in Buffalo
- Thandiwe Newton plays Claire, Griff’s old flame who joins the project
- Steve Zahn is Kenny, a lovable disaster with addiction issues
- Daniela Melchior appears as Ana, a jungle guide tied to an illegal mining subplot
On paper, this should crackle. In reality, the relationships feel undercooked. The supposed emotional core — old friends reconnecting through filmmaking — barely registers. Even the hinted romance never quite sparks.
Jack Black, especially, feels like a missed opportunity. This film practically begs for a Mystery Science Theater 3000-style roast of the original Anaconda, yet the characters treat the 1997 film with strange reverence instead of mockery.
What worked
- The idea itself: A meta satire about reboot culture is timely and sharp
- Paul Rudd’s weary charm still does some heavy lifting
- A few slapstick moments — involving animals and physical comedy — land decently
- Self-awareness: The film knows Hollywood is stuck eating leftovers
There’s a better movie hiding inside this one.
What didn’t
- Not funny enough for a comedy
- Not scary enough for a creature feature
- No real bite in its industry satire
- Clumsy action and underwhelming snake sequences
- PG-13 restraint drains tension and shock
The illegal gold-mining subplot, meant to justify danger and body count, feels awkward and distracts from the central premise. The horror beats are timid, the kills rare, and the snake surprisingly unthreatening.
Worst of all, the film pulls its punches. It wants to critique Hollywood’s obsession with IP — but still needs to sell that IP.
The missed opportunity
This could have been Tropic Thunder for creature features — chaotic, ruthless, and fearless. Instead, it settles for mild satire and soft nostalgia. The film pokes fun at itself just enough to feel clever, but never enough to feel dangerous.
Hollywood is willing to laugh at itself — as long as it doesn’t hurt.
Final verdict
Anaconda is a clever idea trapped in a cautious execution. It knows exactly what’s wrong with the studio system, but lacks the venom to say it out loud. With sharper jokes, bolder horror, and less reverence for its own past, this could have been a cult classic reborn.
Instead, it’s a self-aware reboot that forgets the most important rule of satire: if you’re going to bite, bite hard.
Verdict: A smart concept, dulled by studio-safe instincts
