...and not necessarily for being "enjoyably bad." They also agree that Jon Voight deserves a Best Supporting Actor nomination. See for yourself, the review's as much fun as the movie...
http://bventertainment.go.com/tv/buenavista/atm/reviews.html?sec=6& ; ;subsec=anaconda
"I'll tell you something if you won't think I'm crazy...I've got grasshoppers taped to my back."
OH MY GOD that was amazing!!!!
Hah i love watching old S + E reviews and this one just blows my mind. i thought you were joking before I watched it. They seriously contemplate him being worthy of an oscar nod. WTFFFF they were smoking crack in the green room that day apparently.
And yet, amusingly, the film has attained so-bad-its-good cult status. What the hell Jon Voight was doing in it, however...lol...
shareThis is the movie that Jon Voight was born to star in. This was his pre-destined 'calling card.' Forget his role as the Pope. Forget his Oscar-worthy role as a disgruntled Mormon bishop in "September Dawn." This is the role that cemented Voight's incomparable legacy: The muscular/hulking Paraguayan pony-tailed snake catcher villainous SOG with a one million percent bona fide South American accent.
Nor has anyone -BEFORE OR SINCE- pulled off such an amazing acting performance -even if it was in a 'villainous' role...
Hahaha that was pretty cool. This movie is one of my guilty pleasures.
shareEbert later told Richard Roeper how good he thought Voight was in this film. Roeper looked at him with a mixture of amazement and confusion and replied "I don't know what you're talking about!"
shareDo you have a link to that? Or even just what review they were discussing at the time when he referenced that?
I love watching Roger Ebert and I came to know him too late.
Thumbs Up, Thumbs Down and a Wagging Finger of Shame
Just from memory. And if I recall correctly, Roger suggested Jon Voight's performance was worthy of an Oscar nomination. Roeper wasn't inclined to agree.
shareNot only did Roger give it 2 thumbs up but he gave it 3 and 1/2 stars. But then he gave 4 stars to quite a lot of movies.
http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/anaconda-1997
[deleted]
I came to the sad realization that Ebert was a mere mortal when he praised this movie, and yet gave a bad review to The Mummy. This is terrible.
share"There is within me an unslaked hunger for preposterous adventure movies. I resist the bad ones, but when a "Congo" or an "Anaconda" comes along, my heart leaps up and I cave in. "The Mummy" is a movie like that. There is hardly a thing I can say in its favor, except that I was cheered by nearly every minute of it. I cannot argue for the script, the direction, the acting or even the mummy, but I can say that I was not bored and sometimes I was unreasonably pleased. There is a little immaturity stuck away in the crannies of even the most judicious of us, and we should treasure it."
I'm bummed.
The link's broken and the page doesn't work anymore.
If anyone could provide the link to the old video, you'd be saving a life!
I'd love to see this particular episode...
Thumbs Up, Thumbs Down and a Wagging Finger of Shame