tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3649594811552139256.post5597598936544668030..comments2024-03-11T02:35:53.846-07:00Comments on Roger Ebert's Worst Reviews: 14. Anaconda (1997)Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3649594811552139256.post-61349410534378143632021-01-12T16:11:07.405-08:002021-01-12T16:11:07.405-08:00Roger gave this bad film a positive review, this h...Roger gave this bad film a positive review, this has to go down as one of his worst in his entire career.TheAnonymousBlogger1999https://www.blogger.com/profile/12685899422160774141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3649594811552139256.post-7014291449968009292021-01-12T16:10:22.258-08:002021-01-12T16:10:22.258-08:00Roger Ebert gave Anaconda 3 1/2 stars? Seriously? ...Roger Ebert gave Anaconda 3 1/2 stars? Seriously? I can enjoy a fun action horror romp when it’s done well, but this movie was terrible with really bad writing, special effects, and acting. I don’t understand why he liked this film so much and he had the gall to criticize other classic films with such a high vitriol. This is probably one of the worst movies I ever saw, it deserves the negative reviews that it got. 1 star at the very most.TheAnonymousBlogger1999https://www.blogger.com/profile/12685899422160774141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3649594811552139256.post-27341475512724366382016-08-19T17:10:08.310-07:002016-08-19T17:10:08.310-07:00Sorry. I think that Ebert was one of the few peop...Sorry. I think that Ebert was one of the few people who really GOT this movie... maybe not quite 3 1/2 stars worth, but it was much better than it should have been... and particularly within this genre, it really stood out. It was a fun and exciting movie and it was eminently entertaining. I certainly would have given it at least 3 stars.<br />aarondavidkinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00908450858346561359noreply@blogger.com