Python 2 (2002 Video) User Reviews

This "Python" has no bite

[souldog · 2/10 · 17 June 2003]

Where as the original "Python" was somewhat entertaning in a tongue-in-cheek sort of way, this made-for-cable-TV sequel fails on all levels.

"Python 2" is a horrible movie with nearly no relation to the original. A group of CIA thugs try to capture a large python and transport away for "Civilian Safety".

The lead actors (one of whom is played by Dana Ashbrook of "Twin Peaks") have zero chemistry together. The effects look very cheesy.

And the worst offense of all? William Zabka's returning character suffers the worst kind of character assasination. He is no longer portrayed as the good guy's (if bumbling) older brother small town cop, but is now the movie's main human bad guy. Shady right from the beginning, I was even uncertain this was the same character from the original...

I'm not saying that this "Python" franchise is the best... but at least if you are going to the trouble of bringing back a surviving character from the previous entry, don't alienate your fanbase and do a character swerve.

"Python 2" has no bite.

Python's poor cousin

[Chase_Witherspoon · 3/10 · 29 April 2011]

Fugitive ex-baseball star and his Russian bride find themselves the unwitting pawns in a CIA-led mission to recover a giant, highly agile python that has been unintentionally released from its cargo hold by Chetynan rebels, and is now on the prowl at a Soviet military base.

Generally, the acting is either very pedestrian, or totally over the top, with stereotypical characterisations of mobsters, mercenaries and military types, all of whom attempt to exude too much sentiment for the depth of their characters. The film largely takes place on a military base, in which, a supposedly crack team of commandos hunts down and attempts to capture the giant reptile, with catastrophic results for most concerned. It's formula 'catch and kill' stuff, and plays out like a video game. Only Zabka's mildly tongue-in-cheek performance offers any hint of talent, his presence the fragile pedigree to "Python", although despite, ostensibly, playing the same character, the persona are vastly different. Mackinnon's accent is painfully erratic, with an obvious Australian drawl surfacing in moments of despair, while perennial Russian-mafia typecast Binev, is becoming something of a staple in these types of movies, making a virtual 'guest' appearance as a Russian-esque mobster.

The title reptile is even less convincing than in "Python", the CGI effects so blurry and poorly scaled, that the occasional interaction with a cast member is laughably absurd. Corny sets and cheap-looking outdoor staging is soon surpassed as the film takes up permanent residence on a fictitious military base, thus descending into a cat and mouse game with the snake, while stealth fighters prepare to raze the facility, to silence all witnesses. In spite of the competing threats, there's little, if any suspense, and a poorly executed climax that looks anything but the feared demolition that was to have taken place, to 'neutralise the situation', or 'go black' in the apparent CIA-speak oft employed throughout the picture by Zabka.

Overall, if you like big snake movies, then you may be moderately satisfied with this basic offering; on the other hand, if you're more discerning, say, "Anaconda" rather than "Python", then you're unlikely to find it here.

The Python Franchise (Spoiler)

[coolguyelijahsavestheworld · 4/10 · 15 June 2015]

OK, here we go. I saw this movie on the Sci-Fi channel when I was like 6. The big difference between this one and the 1st one, is the attempt. The 1st one didn't really try to make itself very serious, making it a nice corny B-movie. The bad things about this one is that it tries, and Billy Zabka. Main idea: giant snake captured by U.S. Plane carrying that snake is shot down by Russians. When the Russians take the cargo that contains the snake, all heck breaks loose. So Billy Zabka and his gang go in and try to kill it. There isn't really anything funny about this movie. Mostly sad. The thing that upset me most was that Billy Zabka dies. THE ONLY RETURNING CHARACTER dies. Yeah, good way to attract your audience. He was the only character in the movie that had a little bit of luster. So they turn him into a bad guy. The snake CGI isn't the best, but it's manageable. The script has some holes in it, but that's not what killed this movie. Another funny thing about this movie is, the only well rounded characters in this movie get killed. If you can look past all that, though, the movie is OK.

More annoying than entertaining

[gtc83 · 23 March 2004]

There's a certain paint-by-numbers formula that these creature movies follow: the creature is always created by the military, which never makes any sense but we can live with it if the movie's good. The movie always seems to end up in a dark basement full of pipes. The good guys shoot the creature numerous times, but considering it's obviously added via CGI in post-production, shooting it never seems to have any effect. And then there's the half day of work they pay the pyrotechnics crew for, which is the last scene where the monster is destroyed. This movie follows the same formula, but overlays it with the Sci-Fi channel formula of having the characters behave obnoxiously and fight amongst themselves for reasons of, well, apparently they saw people doing that in a real movie once.

In this flick, a giant snake is loose in a really small Russian military base. A team of commandos goes in to get it, but they need a truck to haul it back with. Yeah, you know, all that training, all those weapons, all that organization, and a 100 thousand dollars to throw around, but no truck. So they do something that this audience member really regrets: they hire an American truck driver to accompany them.

So they get to the base and find that the 85 foot, 12 ton snake has escaped its refrigerator sized box, and since it's now obvious that they won't simply be hauling it back on a truck, they tell the truck driver to go away. Oh, if only he had. They even paid him the whole 100 grand, for doing nothing, and yet he still sticks around. What follows is the snake attacking these folks numerous times, and the truck driver whining and complaining about being put in danger. Didn't they give him 100 thousand and tell him to go away? He even punches the guy for getting him into the whole mess, but wait... he tried NOT to get him into this mess. Then he demands to know "the whole story". Oh please, please go away!

That's what really ruins this thing, the typical Sci-Fi Channel obnoxious lead character. Leave him out and it would have been quite watchable.

Ouch... my eyes

[lcri-1 · 1/10 · 25 August 2006]

Things I like about Python 2: -It has snakes. -It's a sequel to a decent movie... Things I hate about Python 2: -This seems unbelievable, but the CGI is actually WORSE than the first one. This was just terrible, and sad. Oh so sad. -The plot makes NO FUDGING SENSE. Why where those snakes in that container (for that matter, how did they FIT INTO the container)? What was the opening scene about? And WHAT IS UP with the blonde dude from the first movie? Who is he working for? WHY!!? Who thought his big "plot twist" was a good idea? -Where are the other actors from the first film? I guess they read the script... -And finally, this movie makes the same mistake as Anaconda-it takes itself far too seriously. The first one was littered with dumb gags and innuendo, but they tried to make this movie about GIANT SNAKES a WAR DRAMA!! What's up with that!? This is THE worst Sci-Fi movie I have ever seen.

Manages to be even worse than the original

[TheLittleSongbird · 1/10 · 9 February 2013]

I do like low-budget movies when they're entertaining and have a story and characters to care about. I greatly disliked the original Python, and when I read that there was a sequel I decided to see it just to see how it compared. I'd go as far to say after watching it that it's even worse. It makes all the mistakes of the original film, and in most cases it does those mistakes worse. Like the original, Python 2 looks cheap, the settings are nothing new and look bland and the photography and editing are choppy, but they are at least a little better than the special effects(which the close-ups are not kind to), to say that they are cartoonish is an insult to the word cartoonish. The antagonistic snake is not menacing in the slightest, we learn nothing about it and it is utilised poorly. The script is contrived often and sometimes feel like padding, and the story(you decide whether the fact that it has no connection in this regard to the original Python is a good thing or not) is so predictable and lacking in suspense you'll know how it'll end even at the halfway mark. There are so many laugh-out-loud ridiculous moments that you can write a book about them as well. The characters are every stereotype you can think of, and to make it worse they are both obnoxious and poorly developed. The acting, like the original, is dire though at least the original Python had Robert Englund trying hard with the material working against him. Here everybody is either over-compensating or going through the motions. In conclusion, a terrible sequel that manages to be even worse than the original. 1/10 Bethany Cox

Ever wondered what the scummiest, lamest, piece of cheap crap looked like?

[patrick-green · 1/10 · 8 May 2006]

This film is an awful and boneless piece of junk that does not even make up for the original failure, Python. In fact it includes all of from the faults from the first one plus a whole bunch of new ones! The plot is basic trash taken to a new level: the American army captures a uselessly large and unhappy python, but the plane which is transporting it crashes, as usual, and the safe(best word to describe it) containing the beast is taken by the Russian army who takes it to a military base and... opens it. You know the rest. This is Anaconda mixed with Alien, but without the quality. The actors are a pointless bunch of nondescript idiots who include a would-be murderer base-ball player(ludicrous) and a character from the previous episode, the useless and pathetic failed FBI agent. The snake is even more awful than in the first one because there are TWO of them. ARRGGGG! Two times sixty feet of awfulness! Things I learned from this movie: -Whopping enormous pythons are common in Russia. -Whopping ginormous pythons will fit easily into a tiny safe-like box. -Base-ball players can kill people with a ball.

Epic

[esquilax_9 · 1/10 · 13 August 2007]

Forget King Kong. Forget Godzilla. Python 2 (or, as it is even more awesomely named in the UK 'SNAKES') is truly the defining monster movie of our times, perhaps any times.

So awesome is this tale of man and reptile, in fact, that the distributors see fit to charge no more than £1 for it in bargain basement DVD buckets. So epic is it, that the producers avoided putting any of their or their actors' or directors' names on the back of the DVD cover. That there are no special features at all should be of no importance.

Why, if you squint you eyes and smear your screen with Vaseline you can almost dare to say the CGI Snake looks real. The actors' performances are so virtuoso they barely move at all on screen. One woman was even included in the cast! The plot tells a weeping tale of tragedy and the folly of over-ambition, as the government (or, some guys with guns at least) try to recapture a big freaking' snake in a military base somewhere in Russia. Surely some social commentary on our times, friends.

This movie will change your life. I haven't even finished watching it yet and I am moved to review it on IMDb.

Better than the first one...

[TheUnknown837-1 · 4/10 · 16 July 2005]

But far from being a good film. The snakes (there's two this time)look better this time and they put a little more effort into it. Now the snake is being transported in a titanium container (except how could a sixty-foot snake be crammed into that tiny thing? Probably the best graphics of the movie is when they're hunting the big snake and they paralyze it with an electric gun and it falls down in slow motion while howling loudly. That part was actually a pretty decent shot for a movie like this. But the rest of it was kind of cheesy. Oh, and why would you stick a pistol that's set to fire in your back pocket? That's just suicide. That'd be of great help if you're running from those big snakes and get shot down your leg. Oh, and the character who had that gun in her back pocket, she wasn't even able to see a man standing five feet away from her, yet she's doing a rather good job of finding her way around. So much for being nearly blind. Overall, it's a lot better than the first one, but still not a movie I'd want to watch very often.

Not Good--But Better Than Its Overall Rating

[Uriah43 · 4/10 · 24 February 2016]

Somewhere in Russia an American officer has been tasked to lead some Russian soldiers on a secret mission to capture an 80 foot snake that was created by American scientists and has gotten loose near the Ural Mountains. Not long afterward, the officer, "Colonel Jefferson" (Marcus Aurelius) accomplishes his assigned task and puts the snake aboard an American cargo plane heading for the United States. Unfortunately, some Chechen rebels mistake the plane for a Russian one and shoot it down. This action alerts a Russian army unity nearby who then attack the rebels and subsequently take the mysterious container back to a nearby base. Curious as to what is inside they open it. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that I was somewhat surprised by the results. For starters, I expected a movie replete with mindless action and special effects with no regard to anything resembling an in-depth plot or competent acting of any kind. Yet, while there was plenty of mindless action, rather poor special effects, and a predictable plot, I didn't think the acting was necessarily that bad at all. As a matter of fact, I kind of liked the performances of William Zabka (as the CIA agent, "Greg Larsen") and Simmone MacKinnon ("Nadia"). However, having said that, I don't believe this movie was great-or even good-by any means. It simply exceeded my expectations to a certain extent and for that reason I have rated it accordingly. Slightly below average.

pure genius

[redshootingtwo · 9/10 · 8 June 2006]

Can you say best B movie ever? well neither can I because that title belongs to reptilicus. But still the genius that went into this movie is astounding. Beautiful plot, great characters, and a perfect ending. Let's start with the plot of a romantic couple of some sucky baseball player and a foreign chick winning a romantic get-a-way to a Russian military testing site for super fast intelligent blah blah blah ... pythons and a crazy guy who looks like Chet Stedman from the movie Rookie of the Year or Keys from Predator 2 and his 2 henchmen Bones and Tattoo. And of course both parties can't just leave the complex because of fires and not one but TWO! pythons (how original). So their long elaborate scientific plan is to use dynamite to blow up the fire you know instead of something useful like blow up the snakes and safely leave. So they have the foreign chick somehow escape the complex and run about two miles away to go into the crazy dude's van. And wait it gets better, instead of calling for help or looking for someone that could help them she runs back to the complex to get back into an inescapable place. So of course they have to cross a bridge where the pythons are clearly both at the bottom of and they of course have the lovable Bones and Tattoo cover the front and rear that way they can be picked off with no inconvenience to the pythons. And instead of blowing up the snake with a few explosives they throw about 50 containers of C-4 into the fires. somehow it works and there is enough oxygen for them to pass but on the way out Chet Stedman himself unfortunately dies at the hands of the python. At this point I was laughing too hard to see the rest of this movie but it has become my goal in life to find it you can see the ending for yourself but guaranteed that you will love it a solid 9 out of 10.

a good movie!

[MatrixFan02 · 7/10 · 27 September 2003]

Just like the first one, the movie was good, but in this movie the CG snake was better, they had more money so the snake ate people on-screen instead of off-screen. The acting was OK. But on the first movie...the CG snake wasn't good in a few shots. I liked the movie. But...the kicker is there is now 2 snakes, instead of one.that complicated it abit, e.g. how long is the new snake, how was it made, why is it there?. All together I liked the movie, my favourite scene was when the orignal snake was chasing Nalia.

Poor Billy

[Eleanor_Zissou · 2/10 · 26 October 2020]

Glad he can shine as a Cobra again and doesn't have to fight Python's in lousy Z-movies....

Hey, how many Giant Snake movies have you seen filmed in the ex-USSR?

[davidemartin · 15 September 2003]

I was puzzled by the credits being mostly Russian names. Then I realized this was a movie set in Russia that actually WAS shot in Russia!

So I say, cut it some slack. A stray thought-- the actors playing soldiers in the film probably WERE former members of the Red Army! They certainly had the moves. And the CGI serpents are pretty dang good! I was impressed by a couple of sequences. In one, the snake's underside reflects the light of the flamethrower being used (ineffectually) against it. The other nicely-done sequence is lifted from Gandalf's "death" in LotR: TFotR, with a serpent playing the Balrog role.

Well, you know what you are getting here at least...

[paul_haakonsen · 4/10 · 16 July 2019]

Well, when you sit down to watch a movie such as the 2002 movie "Python 2", then you know exactly what you are getting yourself into. And director Lee McConnell and writer Jeff Rank delivers exactly what you'd expect - a campy and goofy creature feature with questionable effects.

The storyline is generic, even by creature feature standards. So don't get your hopes up for a slice of cinematic masterwork here in "Python 2". The storyline is straightforward, for sure, but it is predictable to the core.

As for the special effects, well I will say that the effects worked well enough to their purpose. Now, it wasn't particularly impressive effects, and some was even downright laughable. But hey, this is a creature feature, so a relatively crappy special effects and CGI display is to be expected.

I am a sucker for creature features, though I know that I am 95% likely to be in for a less than mediocre movie experience whenever I sit down to watch such a movie. And that was also the case with "Python 2". So at least I wasn't disappointed.

The python itself, well in concept it was interesting. However, in translation to the screen, some of the appeal died due to questionable special effects. And the sounds they opted for the snake was just downright ludicrous. It made absolutely no sense that snakes can growl, snarl and such. It just added such a goofy level to the movie, and it was dragging the movie down. Snakes are silent killers, with occasional hissing. It is not rocket science!

It was actually nice to see the likes of William Zabka and Dana Ashbrook in a movie such as this, and they were actually the reason why the movie managed to stay afloat and be watchable.

If you enjoy the usual goofy and campy creature features, then chances are you will mildly enjoy "Python 2". However, I doubt that this movie will ever return to my media player for a second viewing ever.

Not that bad of a film

[slayrrr666 · 7/10 · 3 March 2004]

'Pythons 2' is one of the few made-for-TV movies that manages to surprise the viewer with so many twists and turns that it becomes a very enjoyable movie.

**SPOILERS**

An American-Russian mission in Russia recovers an 80-foot python and plans to bring it on an airplane to a military base, but Russian rebels force it down. They take the container, unknowingly holding the snake, to another Russian base where the snake escapes. An independent shipper, Greg Larson, (Billy Zabka) hires Dwight Stoddard (Dana Ashbrook) and his wife Nalia (Simmone Jade MacKinnon) to bring the container to Munich, where Greg can ship it to America. They arrive at the base, and discover that Larson doesn't want to sneak it across the border. Starting to distrust Greg, Dwight and Nalia anxiously wait while Greg and several other members of a small strike force break into the deserted base. One of them, McEwen (Vince Diamond) finds the snake, but dies, bringing the attention of Dwight and Nalia to the military complex. Realizing they can't capture the snake, Larson is ordered to get the DNA and tells Dwight and Nalia to leave. They decide to stay and the snake strikes. Checking the blueprints to find a way out, and Larson goes to check it. The only way to get out is the ventilation ducts, and they have to battle past snakes to make it outside for the C-4 needed to escape.

The Good News: 'Pythons 2' is more entertaining than one might expect for a made-for-TV movie. It has unusually high production values, allowing for expansive cinematography and bigger sets than its predecessor. The acting is more believable, as the cast gives a more relaxed feeling in certain scenes. That also allows for more than one snake in the movie, though not in the same scene. The only time it comes even close is the final ten minutes, but at least they tried to do something different in the story. The original was simply a re-telling of 'Anaconda' told in a suburban setting. Here, the story changes to a military base in Russia. The Russian countryside is captured beautifully, making its cold mountains and dry landscape eerily inviting. The bigger budget also allows for a better pyrotechnic show, as explosions are going off in, mostly realistic, action scenes. The big selling point is that the movie tries and successfully incorporating suspense into the story. The opening scene in the Ural Mountains cave is particularly good, as the filmmakers try an almost unused source for suspense: the unseen wails of an enemy off in the distance. I had hoped other monster movies would use this trick to better effect in other movies, but 'Pythons 2' is the only one I've seen that has effectively done this.

The Bad News: The nay-sayers to this movie may scream that the plot is unoriginal and makes the film seem like a retarded 'Aliens,' but this is actually far from the truth. Here, the film deals with the soldiers trying to kill a creature that they are supposed to keep alive, which gives the film its one true downfall. We spend so much time in the buildup of the relationships of the soldiers that the middle part of the movie has no real action to it. There are almost no snake scenes, and the movie does tend to fall a bit flat in that area. Also, the mention of the first film was good, and by having Larson come back made the transition easier, but if this is supposed to be a true sequel, why did only one scene have the snake spit that acidic venom at his opponents? It's a good scene, and puts a little bit more gore into the story, but other than that one scene, the snake never uses it again. It should've been injected more into the movie more.

The Final Verdict: While not terribly bad, 'Pythons 2' is still an enjoyable movie. It has a little bit of everything for a nice, well-rounded film. It misses sometimes, but it has some good moments as well. Pretty much recommended for people who enjoy 90 minutes without feeling wasted and for people who like lizard films will like this one.

Rated R: Violence, Language.

Pretty decent for a TV film.

[willywants · 4 December 2003]

"Python 2" is rather underrated in my opinion. Granted, the sets can be seen in many other low-budget science fiction channel projects like "Dragonfighter" and "epoch", the characters were stereotypical and the plot was absurd (How the heck are they going to train a seventy-five foot snake to do things for the military?), but the actors were competent, the special effects are surprisingly good for a television film (SpoilersAcid-spittings, soldiers getting bitten two, people being swallowed whole, a impressive-looking CG snake), it was generally inoffensive and quite watchable, I must say I enjoyed it. People keep bashing it, but remember..it's a TV film, not a big-budget hollywood blockbuster. Just ignore the few irritating flaws in the plot and I think you'll enjoy it, too.

Not that bad of a film

[kannibalcorpsegrinder · 7/10 · 30 August 2012]

Hired for his transportation services, a former mercenary and his wife accompanying a secret convoy to a Soviet military base find it overrun by a gigantic snake and must battle the creature to get out alive.

This here turned out rather decently overall, though it's better than might be expected. The location being kept in the darkened military base underground with its tight, cramped quarters and endless corridors always it to have a bit of a creepier feel than expected, especially when it winds itself up and really lets loose in the second half. That it focuses on the more traditional forms of suspense with its wailing cry off in the distance and being hidden away in the location makes these scenes far better than expected, and generally makes it quite exciting at times. While it does provide a nice body count within, the fact that the CGI for the snake is so ludicrous that it rarely looks realistic enough and really takes that away from the film. Also quite flawed is the fact that it doesn't really have a sequel feel to it, with little to connect it to the first one other than one character, and that's not saying much else for it. It's also got a tendency to fall into cliché far too often and feel reminiscent of too many other films when it could've done something unique with the material. That quality with the CGI, though, is the film's real true falling grace and what holds it down.

Rated R: Violence and Language.

below average sequel WARNING!!!!! SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!

[callanvass · 10 August 2004]

below average sequel is weakly made and directed and plus it's not that particularly exciting and is dull to boot and the snake effects are really shoddy and has some lame flashbacks from the original the acting is so William Zabaka is really good here once again but this time around he is a lot different then he used to be SPOILERS!!!! you will see why near the end of the film Simmone Mackinnon is alright here and didn't convince me all that much and lets her accent do the acting Dana Ashbrook and Alex Jolig do alright Jolig lets his accent do the acting as well i really have nothing more to say other then Don't bother *1/2 out of 5 there is no one to root for either so all the characters except Larson are unlikable

Why Snakes?

[teuthis · 13 September 2003]

Someone with Science Fiction clout, but no talent, in TV programming has decided that giant snakes, among the slowest creatures on earth, make frightening movie monsters. Well they don't. I dearly love monster movies, but these snake pictures are simply useless. This one follows the really awful, 'en vogue formula to the hilt, and straight down the slithery slope of utter ennui. In my estimation these "lighter than air, faster than greased pigs" reptiles are utterly without any redeeming "monster" qualities.

The snakes are almost incidental to the film. They are so badly portrayed as to have no personality, and absolutely no sense of dread about them. They are mechanical vehicles of the plot, which is terminally boring from the first scene. The only character I even cared about was the beautiful Russian redhead, and that's just because she is so gorgeous to watch. It seems that the director just didn't know how to portray people with any sense of timing or reality. The characters, and the acting, quickly fell apart under vague and vapid direction. The plot was never in attendance.

The film seemed to drag on forever as inept warriors pointed their fancy guns into dark corners, and blasted away at cartoon snakes to no discernable avail. The snakes moved much faster than the action. I felt that the director was simply trying to figure out how to prolong this mess long enough to eke out the requisite 90 minutes, sans commercials. It didn't work. Avoid this mess unless you are addicted to lovely redheads.

Two Horrible Films

[Michael_Elliott · 2 December 2008]

Python (2000)

BOMB (out of 4)

Robert England plays a mad scientist who created a huge python that spits acid. I'm terrified of snakes, which means I usually have a good time being scared with snake movies but this one here was downright awful and ranks as one of the worst films I've seen the past twenty years. The acting is atrocious, the screenplay laughable and the special effects are terrible looking.

Python 2 (2002)

BOMB (out of 4)

The American government brings home an eight-five foot snake, which eventually escapes and starts eating people. This is another horrid, direct to video horror movie but it's slightly better than the first film since this one here runs ten minutes shorter. Is that any kind of recommendation?

This movie wasn't nearly as bad as the first ten minutes made it look. Give it a chance.

[dennisdonnerson · 14 July 2003]

This movie did a rare thing for me: it started out so badly that I was going to slam it, utterly...and then it got BETTER and I decided it was okay. I found that the main good guy (the mover of heavy cargo) was likeable due to his quirky origin story, and his Russian wife was cute. Also, there was a pretty solid plot link to the first "Python" movie.

The lead good guy looked like a cheaper version of Bruce Campbell, but his acting actually got better as the movie progressed. The woman who played his wife was fairly convincing. Billy Zabka, who played the leader of the mercenaries, did the best job, rising above the material.

Python 2 has aged well and deserves a second chance.

[treeingwalker · 11 February 2021]

The original PYTHON is kind of all over the place in terms of its tone, the consistency of its special effects, acting, directing, production design, you name it. PYTHON II, however, is a much more consistent film throughout, and tells a story that is a structurally more simple and better suited for this type of film.

PYTHON is set in small town USA, but the sequel takes place somewhere in Russia with a backdrop of political tension with Chechnya. The bright colors of the first film give way to a more subdued pallet here, and the tone is more straight and narrow than some of the all out sillyness that has preceded it. PYTHON II is a more focused film though.

The focus here is more on the relationship between Dana Ashbrook and Billy Zabka's characters. Zabka, by the way, plays a much more intriguing version of Greg Larson in PYTHON II than he does in PYTHON. Zabka is allowed to spread his wings a bit more in this film. He's a more significant character and occupies a position of agency, whereas in the first film he mostly just reacts to things in the vein of a detective story. Ashbrook's Dwight Stoddart is a former MLB player with a rough past following him, and the lack of trust between him and Larson keeps a good deal of tension fueling the plot even when the snake is not present (hint: it is not present very often in this movie).

The shortcomings are obvious. To my knowledge they shot this one in about two weeks. The special effects, even for 2002, are lacking. Whereas the structure of the film's plot is not very ambitious, the scope of some of the special effects is. Squads of elite military soldiers attacking giant snakes in massive caves, stealth bombers conducting a bombing raid on a military base. These parts of the movie do not look that great because they're biting off more than they can chew. I like that the plot doesn't reach for much: the characters are after some secret cargo which they plan to transport. Larson hires Stoddart to transport it. Great. But some of the other stuff needs to fall into place with the scope of the film's budget, and trying to stretch out what the budget was capable of providing shows in ways that are not ideal. It's probably worth saying that the snake does not look better than it did in the first film.

PYTHON II is not a good movie per se, but if it's a bad movie it's far from being bad in an unbearable or offensive way. It's not perfect. It's kind of awkward at times, and not as 'fun' as PYTHON, but I recommend it to b-movie fans, especially if you enjoyed the first film, as PYTHON II puts in some admirable effort to make a connection with its predecessor.