Anaconda (2025) Review: A Meta Jungle Adventure That Has No Right Being This Fun

There are few horror films more ingrained in late-90s pop culture than Anaconda (1997), a cult classic remembered as much for its absurdity as its snake-sized spectacle. The sequels that followed are best left unmentioned. So when a comedy-leaning reimagining of Anaconda was announced, skepticism felt justified. This was not a sequel anyone asked for, and certainly not one that felt necessary.

And yet, against all expectations, Anaconda (2025) turns that hesitation into a surprisingly entertaining, self-aware jungle romp that understands exactly what it is and leans into it without apology.

A Movie About Making a Movie, Until the Movie Becomes Real

At its core, Anaconda (2025) is a movie about filmmakers who never quite lived out their dreams. A group of longtime friends decide to finally chase the idea that has lived in their heads since childhood: making their own version of Anaconda. What begins as a scrappy independent production quickly spirals into something far more dangerous when a real anaconda enters the picture.

The clever twist here is that the characters are not inflated versions of the actors themselves, nor are they playing exaggerated caricatures. They are simply people trying to make an indie film, having fun doing it, traveling to the jungles of Brazil to shoot on location, and learning very quickly that inspiration and survival are two very different things. They came out to make Anaconda, and suddenly they are inside it.

That meta framing gives the film room to comment on independent filmmaking, creative ambition, and the chaos that comes with chasing passion projects later in life, all while still delivering plenty of genre thrills.

Chemistry, Comedy, and a Cast That Fully Commits

The core ensemble works remarkably well together, particularly Jack Black, Paul Rudd, Steve Zahn, and Thandiwe Newton. Their chemistry feels lived-in and authentic, selling the idea that these characters share a long history filled with half-finished dreams and inside jokes. The banter flows naturally, often feeling borderline improvised, and it becomes one of the film’s strongest assets.

Steve Zahn and Selton Mello emerge as scene-stealing standouts. Both lean fully into the comedy without undercutting the tension, proving how effective strong supporting performances can be when actors are allowed to shift the focus of a scene without hijacking it. Their timing, physicality, and willingness to embrace the film’s sillier instincts elevate nearly every sequence they are in.

The film is unapologetically campy at times, occasionally corny, and fully aware of its own ridiculousness. It knows when to push the humor and when to pull back just enough to let the danger register.

The Snake, the CGI, and Leaning Into the Spectacle

Yes, the anaconda is CGI, and no, that is not a dealbreaker here. While practical effects will always have their place, the digital creature is handled far better than expected. The snake looks imposing, moves with weight, and delivers genuinely tense moments that recall the spirit of classic creature features, occasionally even evoking Jurassic Park in how suspense is built before the chaos hits.

There are a handful of effective jump scares, strong sound design that makes every movement feel close, and a score that knows when to heighten the tension or lean into the absurdity. The film’s tone shifts frequently, but rarely in a way that feels accidental.

And hilariously enough, somewhere along the way, the movie also becomes an unintentional masterclass in the many creative ways one can execute a headbutt.

Affection for the Original and a Crowd-Pleasing Connection

One moment that clearly landed with the audience was the appearance of Ice Cube, which drew a strong reaction in the theater and instantly connected the film back to Anaconda (1997). It is the kind of reveal that would have played even bigger as a genuine surprise rather than something tipped off in advance. Still, the moment works, the crowd loved it, and it reinforces how much affection this film has for the original.

That affection extends throughout the movie, from references and Easter eggs to tonal callbacks that longtime fans will appreciate, even if newcomers can jump in without revisiting the 1997 film beforehand.

Staying through the end credits is strongly encouraged. There is more waiting for those willing to stick around.

A Messy, Entertaining Surprise

Anaconda (2025) is not a perfect film. The plot can be messy, logic occasionally takes a back seat, and the tone sometimes walks a thin line between clever and chaotic. But it is also far more entertaining than it has any right to be.

This was not a sequel that felt necessary, and expectations were understandably low. Yet it delivers laughs, genuine crowd reactions, solid performances, and enough tension to keep things engaging. It is a strange, self-aware comedy-horror that succeeds largely because it commits fully to its concept and never pretends to be anything else.

I was surprised by how much I enjoyed it. This was not a sequel I wanted or needed, but it ended up being a genuinely fun ride.

Final Take

Anaconda (2025) understands that the original became iconic not because it was flawless, but because it was bold, ridiculous, and memorable. This reimagining honors that spirit while carving out its own lane as a movie about passion, friendship, and the thin line between filmmaking fantasy and very real danger.

It is messy, silly, occasionally intense, and ultimately entertaining. Not every reboot needs to redefine a franchise. Sometimes, it just needs to remind audiences why we liked being scared and laughing at the same time.