Reeker (2005) User Reviews

Contrived and typical monster flick that doesn't offer anything new

[Robert_duder · 6/10 · 29 March 2011]

If you follow my reviews you'll know I love a good horror flick, sometimes I even love a bad horror flick but most of all I just love the genre. I have scored films high that very few others would agree with me on but I just find them incredibly entertaining. Reeker seemed to me to be one of those low budget campy horror flicks that might be a hidden gem in the sea of other horror flicks. It is that. The problem with the film is that the concept of the 'monster' that is attacking them is very cheesy/campy and the special effects are incredibly weak. Despite there being some strong characters they don't really go into much development and the characters and story are a little bit predictable or in some cases a lot predictable. Usually that isn't something that bothers me too much since I think a good genre film should have certain ingredients that are the same in every film. I guess I just kept waiting for something bigger and better to happen and nothing ever truly does. I guess I have to give them kudos for trying to slap a big twist at the end of the film but it too is mostly disappointing.

Scott Whyte plays Trip, the wise cracking party animal who survives a surprisingly long time. He never loses the wise cracking part meaning that even when things turn serious he is still the clown and its hard to take the character seriously at all. He does a decent job but the character is really vapid. The lovely Arielle Kebbel plays Cookie who surprises as a decent character. What I mean is that her typical blonde, eye candy character usually just gets picked off but she actually gives a decent performance before getting picked off and she is definitely eye candy. In an odd turn of events Tina Illman comes mostly from doing video game work and she does a solid job as the lead heroine Gretchen. She shows a certain amount of intensity and solid leadership in the cast. Devon Gummersall plays the lead male in the film with a decent subtle strength. He sort of seems weak next to Illman's performance but he does a decent job. He does have a lot of experience behind him in Television and film which helps. His character being blind definitely helps with the intensity behind him and his performance. In a bit of an odd turn veteran character actor Michael Ironside shows up for a small cameo. He doesn't really add anything brilliant to the story and yet he is well enough known that his presence helps the cast. Derek Richardson rounds out the main cast as really just another of the 'extra' friends to get picked off. He really sort of sits in the background until its his time.

Dave Payne write and directs the film and this really does fit straight into his genre of expertise. He has done a lot of straight to video campy films none of which I have seen other than this. He also writes most of what he directs which means, every character, every shot, every event is exactly what he wants and imagined and that is sort of scary. If I had to guess I think David Payne just really likes toying around with ideas and gets them made by being director and writer. Reeker is not a terrible slasher flick, it is just very shallow and that might seem funny but horror films can have a lot of depth and strength to them and Reeker just runs through the motions and when its over you likely won't ever remember it again. I will probably sit down to watch the spin-off/sequel because I do that sort of thing and we can hope maybe it adds more depth to this story. 6/10

not scary and illogical at times

[manicman84 · 4/10 · 11 August 2006]

"Reeker" didn't live up to my expectations at all. The film has really surprising turn in the end which, in contrast to "High Tension", is beneficial for this flick as it sheds a new light on a story which until this time has completely no sense. In fact, "Reeker" doesn't deliver anything new and even misuses certain patterns. In addition, the film is not frightening and evokes not much tension, which is significant shortcoming for this kind of flick. Not so frequent gory scenes are anything but original or imaginative. What's more, the flick drags incredibly and is illogical at times. Similarly to other movies of this genre, characters behaves very irrationally. For instance, the scene with a guy jumping out of the window was ridiculous. On the other hand, among virtues of this film I can rate good cinematography and beautiful desert settings. All in all, I regrettably cannot recommend this horror film.

Smell is the first sense you have when you're born. And the last sense you have when you die...

[paul_haakonsen · 5/10 · 29 January 2016]

"Reeker" from 2005 is not a particularly memorable or outstanding horror movie, despite it actually having originality to it. And the reason for this was that it was just too mundane. In fact, it was only the surprise twist to the storyline towards the end of the movie which was unique, but it really was a twist which wasn't predictable. And as such, then director Dave Payne managed to deliver a horror movie which was watchable, albeit mediocre.

I am not going to spoil anything regarding the twist of events, but I will say that it was a nice change of events to the storyline. Just a shame that it couldn't manage to lift up the rest of the movie.

The story is about a group of people heading out into the desert to participate in a big party. However, they find themselves stranded at a mysteriously deserted diner, and an even stranger being is stalking them, preying on them one by one.

The storyline itself was adequate, but it just didn't stand out in the horror genre. As such, it was a mediocre end result. There were some originality to certain aspects of the story and the mysterious 'reeker' which was hunting the people.

The acting in "Reeker" was quite alright, and people were doing good jobs with their given roles and characters. It was a nice treat to see Michael Ironside in the movie, despite not having that big of a role. Devon Gummersall (playing Jack) was really carrying the movie quite well.

Now, as for the creature design on the reeker creature, well I was impressed. The effects, prosthetics and make-up was quite good. And they managed to put together a rather unique design which helped lift up the movie experience a bit.

The special effects in the movie were also good, and that is a good thing for a horror movie. So thumbs up on this achievement.

All in all then "Reeker" is an entertaining enough movie for what it was, just don't expect to be blown away, as it is a generic and mediocre horror movie. But still worth a watch if you haven't already seen it.

Confused...

[tonywilkes · 1/10 · 1 July 2006]

I'm confused because this is one of the worst films I've ever seen, and yet some people seem to like it. The characters, the dialogue ('Didn't you just go to the bathroom already?' 'Tell that to my bladder') and the acting was awful, and... actually that's enough. Take that away from any film and you have a bunch of set pieces which either work or they don't, but it's not a film in any kind of enjoyable sense.

The pre-credits part at the beginning was great and I was actually set up to enjoy a great film - only it sucked. I quickly realised that I was watching five of the most shallow, dumb-schmuck, downright stoopidest high school folk ever committed to celluloid, and after ten minutes my reaction was 'Jeez, make them die already'. Harsh but true. They weren't even clichés, they were cardboard cut-outs from a How Not To Write A Move book. For a group of young kids thrown together in the midst of an ordeal watch My Little Eye.

The inclusion of a blind guy could have been interesting if it hadn't been handled so badly. The first mention of it - 'Thanks for rubbing it in' - was a bit ridiculous; he's been blind since the age of 6, hasn't he got over it yet? He can't still be bitter about it! And when a trucker meets him he is confused by why he doesn't shake his hand: 'He's blind.' 'Oh.' As if the blind guy (his name's Jack, but his role in the film is essentially Blind Guy) would stay silent and not hold out his hand to be shook when introduced to someone.

In the scene where Blind Guy enters a room and there's a woman with no face scratching a message into a table, he doesn't see her. Because he's blind, you see. But as he keeps mentioning how his hearing compensates for his sight, would he not have heard her moving around? This, coupled with him later saying he was blind since age *7* (apparently a continuity flub), made me think that he was in on the horror side of things. The number of plot holes, blind alleys and red herrings is enough to keep people guessing about what's going on (and not in a good way) and the ending doesn't help either. You can't just montage a bunch of new stuff that makes no sense and have the two surviving characters say 'Do you remember anything about the crash?' 'No. Do you?' 'No.' It's the equivalent of a 7 year old writing a poem and ending it with, 'And then I woke up. It was all a dream'. Blech.

The whole 'Group Stuck In A Horror Motel' thing was done infinitely better in some film I don't remember the name of from 2002/2003. It's ironic that I should forget its name, as the name Reeker will be etched in my memory for a long while yet, and not in a good way.

But hey, you kids have fun!

This Thing Reeks of a Bad Movie

[Escaping_Fate · 1/10 · 20 July 2009]

Awful

Bad acting, plot holes, bad movie.

I know it was low budget but a low budget is no excuse for a bad movie, a huge budget DOES NOT make a good movie, i love "Killer Clowns From Outer Space" and "Bad Taste", both low budget, but great movies! After watching this i came right here to express my disgust and i was speechless to see people liked the damn thing! I can only assume that they were people who had just turned 15 and gone to see their first horror movie or they have not seen enough of the horror genre to see how bad this is or they have never seen anything other then a Hollywood film.

I wanted to like this film, i really did, i just didn't.

A nice low budget effort.

[fikamugg · 4/10 · 14 April 2012]

This is a low budget movie, very low budget in fact, but as such i definitely have seen much worse. There are elements that works rather well. The score and the actors are the best parts. Also the camera work is quite solid and the make-up department has nothing to be ashamed of with the gore work being one of the films strongest parts.

On the negative side is a thin story that can't fill up the 90 min of running time. The gang of five spend the last 75 minutes of the film at the mysterious gas-station and that is at least 30 minutes to long. As a result the film becomes slow paced, which isn't something that has has to be negative, but the script doesn't compensate by developing the characters. The audience actually doesn't know anything about them when the film is over. In this aspect the film fails completely.

Due to the fairly uninteresting events in front of our eyes with a bunch of strangers running around and shouting each others names randomly, it's no surprise that the suspense factor drops. There are some moments, but to few to keep me fully interested. The stench that the viewer should understand to be something threatening does not work particularly well simply because that out of all things that scares us, 99% is sensed through our eyes.

Nuf said. The ending is clever and answers the questions raised during the movie. I believe the film maker has some talent for this genre and it will be interesting to view his next effort, hopefully with a bigger budget.

Stylish and imaginative horror

[DVD_Connoisseur · 7/10 · 11 November 2008]

"Reeker" is a stylish and imaginative horror tale from writer / director Dave Payne.

Set in a small motel in the middle of nowhere, a group of teenagers struggle to keep alive as events turn supernatural and deadly. Why do the teenagers keep having visions of dead people and what is the strange creature that stalks them?

Worthy of a viewing, this is a very watchable movie. The twist in the tale is fiendishly clever and unpredictable and Payne keeps the momentum going at a steady pace.

Genre-regular Michael Ironside makes an appearance as a desperate tourist searching for his missing wife.

7 out of 10.

A sadly accurate title

[JoeB131 · 1/10 · 14 October 2007]

Please, stay away from this garbage.

This was an incomprehensible mess of a movie that only gets sorted out n the last five minutes, and even then it doesn't make sense.

Essentially, the plot is that five friends are on their way to a concert when they encounter a traffic accident (don't stop to see who it is for no good reason) and then proceed on to an abandoned truck stop. They are systematically hunted by a stinking Grim Reeper kind of character, until it is revealed at the end that they were in the car accident, and that the Reeker was collecting those who didn't survive.

It makes absolutely no sense at all. The acting is awful. I even felt sorry for poor Michael Ironside, whose a pretty good actor reduced to doing this sort of schlock.

Fear the Reaper...um, I mean REEKER!

[Coventry · 7/10 · 22 March 2006]

I feel a bit sorry to say that this isn't a great film and sadly suffers from a lack of originality, because I really did enjoy my viewing of "Reeker" and I certainly wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to other hardcore horror fans on the lookout for new thrills! "Reeker" is a fun film, with decent production values and lots of exhilarating gore, and it's only near the end that the script begins to show some major holes and plot twists that featured in many other movies already. Up until when the story becomes painfully predictable, Dave Payne manages to build up some genuine suspense, likable character-drawings and even some vivid black humor. Five twenty-something people who only know each other vaguely are on their way to a famous rave in the desert when their journey suddenly takes a nightmarish turn. After a truly banal drug-incident, the gang returns to the nearest motel, only to find that everyone has mysteriously vanished there. The only living soul for miles around is a middle-aged traveler who has severe problems himself, as he somehow lost his wife on the isolated desert roads. Things get really uncanny when a terrifying figure, bizarrely dressed and smelling horribly, shows up killing the cast members in – it has to be said – very imaginative ways! You certainly won't be complaining about a shortage of excitement, as the film doesn't cut back on grotesque make-up effects or over-the-top gory moments. After the first glimpse at the unusual killer and the ominous atmosphere, it becomes clear that "Reeker" is slightly more ambitious than your average high-school slasher. Such an ambition is definitely praiseworthy and promising for Payne's future career, but sadly his "idea" has been used already in many other (classic as well as more recent) movies before. Of course, I can't mention which ones because that would have the same effect as revealing the actual twist. Michael Ironside is the terrific experienced actor of the film, but he receives excellent feedback from the enthusiast young cast. Derek Richardson (who was in "Hostel") is very good and Gillmore Girl Arielle Kebbel is more than adequate as well. "Reeker" guarantees a fine watch all together, but it's a little shortcoming to end up a genre classic.

Another unoriginal, safe modern horror flick

[The_Void · 5/10 · 1 June 2006]

I was really hoping for a lot more from this modern horror flick, but unfortunately it's slipped into the subdued, 'safe' plot that so many films these days seem to follow and there isn't an awful lot of actual horror on display. The film feels like it's building up to something all the way through, but despite some nice visuals throughout; it fails to deliver on its promise. By far the best thing about the film is the atmosphere, and through competent handling from director Dave Payne, Reeker is given the right feel throughout. The central location; a motel in the middle of nowhere, is a good location for horror and a good sense of hopelessness is generated through it and the character's despair. The cast of characters are the common 'dopey teens', who are on their way to a rave (very original). Things go wrong for them when their car breaks down near to the aforementioned motel, and this is followed by a series of strange events. The location is strangely deserted, they can't get a radio signal and, worst of all, there appears to be something chasing them.

The film starts off with a nice little sequence that sees a family become the victim of...something. From there, the film is suspenseful because you really want to know exactly what is going on in this place where the lead characters have found themselves. I was thinking that there'd be some great revelation just around the corner - but the film makes us wait, wait a bit more and wait again until eventually delivering just about the worst ending a film can have. And just to make things a little bit worse; it's an ending that a great many horror films have used recently, and every single one of them left me disappointed as well. There are some good effects in the film, however, and despite some dodgy CGI in places; things such as the man with no legs may leave some of the less experienced horror viewers with nightmares. The central baddie (I'm guessing the title villain) is good, but it doesn't look very good; and I'd have preferred a man in a cape over the rubbish computer effects that the director has opted for. Overall, this film certainly isn't all bad; but there are far too many flaws for me to call it a success and I don't think the title is a million miles away from being an apt description of the film.

Excellent horror movie

[misbegotten · 9/10 · 30 October 2008]

I regard Reeker as being a great horror movie - one of the best examples of the genre that I've seen in the current decade, though I've noticed that quite a few people seem to have problems understanding the film's storyline.

Here's my interpretation of the movie: the central premise of the film seems to be that sometimes people are killed in accidents that are so sudden that they don't actually realise what's happened. In these cases, the victims find themselves in a limbo between life and death - a world that looks identical to ours, with the exception that nobody else is there, and also time works differently (no matter how long you spend in this limbo, only a few seconds pass in the real world).

This is what happens to the main characters in the film. The moment occurs when they stop at the side of the road to let Trip out, and Cookie takes the opportunity to dash behind the bushes. Everyone feels what they assume to be an earth tremor. In fact, this is when Henry (Michael Ironside) had a heart attack while driving his RV, and plowed into them.

Once they've arrived in limbo, the Reeker hunts down the individuals who didn't survive the accident, killing them in ways similar to how they actually died in the real world (eg: Nelson getting a shard of glass in his throat after crashing through a window, Cookie receiving internal injuries while going to the toilet). As they now realise they're dead, this allows the victims' souls to pass on, going to the afterlife/heaven/hell/whatever.

Jack (the blind guy) and Gretchen survived the crash, and therefore the Reeker wasn't able to kill them.

As for the glimpses of 'the dying people', these are the victims of the other accidents mentioned by the policeman at the end of the movie - including the family we see in the pre-title sequence. They've already been killed by the Reeker, and are in the process of moving on to the afterlife. In the same way - because the limbo is half-way between the land of the living and the realm of the dead - we also occasionally see visions of Radford (the drug dealer) as he tries to save the lives of the crash victims, back in the real world.

The writing in the Bible and on the walls was presumably made by somebody (or several somebodies, over a long period of time) who had previously been trapped in the limbo, and realised that something was after them. Eventually the Reeker must have gotten them.

Gretchen seems to briefly retain some memories of what happened in limbo (She murmurs "Why didn't you try to help us?" to Radford as he pulls her out of the wreckage), and Jack also remarks that he can dimly remember being able to see Gretchen for a moment, but the final scene indicates that they have forgotten about the Reeker and the Half-Way Motel.

I really liked this film

[Marcus-Aurelius90 · 23 February 2016]

I found this movie highly enjoyable. As long as you don't take it seriously, you'll enjoy it. The young cast, including the gorgeous Arielle Kebbel, are fantastic. Veteran actors Michael Ironside and Marcia Strassman (Welcome Black Kotter's Wife) lend some class and experience. This movie is set at night for the most part. The lighting is excellent. There is a twist to this movie that I won't reveal. It worked really well for me. I don't know why this movie only has a rating as low as 5.2.

I thought it was clever and fun. Don't take it seriously, and you and your friends will enjoy it.

Smells Like Teen Spirit...

[JoeytheBrit · 6/10 · 21 December 2007]

As far as modern horrors go, this low budget effort – a kind of Outward Bound meets Final Destination – isn't that bad, and I'm surprised by how low its IMDb rating is. In fact the first half of the film – before anyone gets killed – is quite intriguing, although things go down the well-trodden stalk-and-slash path for the final couple of reels as the usual band of five dislikeable teens invite their own death by doing incredibly stupid things (I have never met a girl in my life who would sit on that gurgling loo).

Old pro Michael Ironside makes an appearance as a bewildered hubby looking for his wife in the wilderness – and the ending of the flick adds an unexpected touch of poignancy to his character's search. Ironside must be one of the few bad-guy actors whose features have actually mellowed as he's grown older. The other actors are the usual bland mix of young faces, most of whom will fade into obscurity or be consigned to TV soap hell within a couple of years. The nominal 'hero' is actually something of a jerk, and you're never really worried about anyone's fate, but the film doesn't hold itself out as anything other than a time-filling horror – a scan of the end credits will tell you that.

The manner in which the twist ending is handled goes some way towards redeeming the preceding twenty minutes, and the part where the blind guy falls off the top of one of those monstrous camper tank things had me laughing out loud - although I had sank a couple of beers. Anyway, If you're in an undemanding mood and enjoy this brand of teen horror then give this one a try

it certainly reeks alright

[stevenkickstart · 1/10 · 5 November 2006]

well i went to the cinema to see this on the back of reading some positive reviews on IMDb and i was really disappointed.Where do i start, it has every horror cliché in the book, the girls are bimbos, the guys are stupid, everyone seems to split up all the time instead of sticking together and the film was just boring.It just seemed to take bits from final destination and jeepers creepers and pass it off as original which it wasn't.It takes a lot for me to want to walk out of a film and i was on my feet a few times but i persevered until the end and even the ending wasn't original so overall a very poor film that doesn't even deserve to be watched on DVD

Reeker Reeked!

[jamie_likeskylie · 1/10 · 2 July 2006]

Before I start my mini-review of Reeker, I must say that I am by no means a high-brow movie buff. The classiest movie I own is Aliens and let it be known that I have DVD's starring the likes of Hulk Hogan, and the great Pia Zadora, and even such classics as Hell Come To Frogtown and the Complete Friday the 13th box set have a place in my collection, I even have Glitter somewhere! Even for a disposable flick, this movie is cheap! I'm talking Poundland. cheap! The killer is invisible throughout at least half of this piece of nonsense. As far as special effects goes, I haven't seen dismembered bodies this ropey since they last showed Day Of The Dead on the Sci-Fi Channel! In fact I think the ones from that movie were better, even though it was made 20 years ago! I will spare you yet another synopsis of this excuse for a 'horror' flick, but I feel it does earn its 1 star for the finale which does help make sense of 90mins of one dull incoherent cliché after another. There are no scares, and certainly no laughs to be had with this lame effort. Rent one of the bad movie classics I mentioned earlier if you have an evening to kill, don't waste time on the Reeker, it stinks!

Truly Average!

[Lebowski85 · 5/10 · 15 June 2006]

I wasn't expecting much from a film called Reeker but being in Argentina was the only film in English available, so i was hoping to be surprised.

Nothing sets this film apart from anything thats been made in the past few years. It contains elements of Final Destination and Identity but doesn't pull the respective elements off as well as it these films.

Obviously one of the main elements in any horror flick is its gore factor which i do admit this film pulls off well, but for most of the film i was asking myself "what next", as is revealed in the end in what i thought was a half decent conclusion. I say conclusion not twist because a twist should take everything you thought you knew about a film and turn it upside down in a stroke of genius, all this does is makes sense of the last hour and half for which i didn't know why all this was happening as it all seemed rather unclear.

The actors do their part as horror isn't exactly a complex role, and the direction is steady throughout so its not gonna blow your mind.

I'm not gonna tell anyone on here to stay away from this film, i like horror and such especially if they try and do something a little different with it like this does but as i said i found it all rather tedious from start to finish. I'm sure there are people who will like this film as the gore and the ending are enough to satisfy but i feel after Saw, Final Destination and Identity, the bar has been raised for what is a slowly revitalised genre.

If you liked any of the above films especially Identity and Final Destination i recommend it but don't expect anything too shocking or original. 5/10

Reeks of Embarrassment!!

[isaacleonard · 1/10 · 3 July 2006]

Went to the Odyessy Cinema in Belfast last night and chose this movie as it was the only one that we thought might be good.

Well in a nutshell, myself and my sister who was visiting from England thought this was one of the worst films ever. TERRIBLE SCRIPT, ACTING, EDITING (in some scenes). Abysmal....FULL STOP! Anybody in their right mind, especially the film makers, studio etc, that believed this to be acceptable knows little about storytelling and/or film making!! DIDN'T STUDIO EXECUTIVES WATCH THE DAILIES, OR EVEN CARE??

The so called twist at the end would have Alfred Hitchcock turning in his grave!!

Ps. The only decent actor was the Blind Guy Don't waste your money or time!!

Mysterious horror that is very effective!

[UniqueParticle · 7/10 · 5 May 2020]

Made like it doesn't cost a lot to make which is ok sometimes if you can budge through. I absolutely love the disturbing aspects of gory people or animals! A bit suspenseful and well edited; which is my favorite thing in a film is good editing! Arielle Kebbel has been in much projects, this is steeped low for her. Reeker is really cool for it's type, I'd definitely recommend it!

Average...at best.

[foreverbleedingblue15 · 3/10 · 20 July 2007]

I should have known before even watching the movie that the title gave the movie away. It "Reeked". To have some descent actors/actresses(blonde guy from Hostel and blonde girl from American Pie, Band Camp) in the film, the plot was just too far fetched. 4 youngsters(1 of them being blind) are traveling through a desert and get stranded at a diner/motel. I will not go into much more detail other than there is some kind of ghost going around killing people like any other blood and gore type movie. Throughout the movie I was thinking there was going to be a silly ending to it, but I was rather surprised that the end tried very hard to be clever but instead came off leaving me thinking "Who came up with this ending" in a bad way. Overall, if you are looking for something to watch late at night it could be worth your time, depending if there is anything else on.

Reeker

[Scarecrow-88 · 6/10 · 10 July 2007]

Heading for a rave, Gretchen(Tina Illman)tells Trip(Scott Whyte)he needs to relinquish a batch of drugs he stole from illegal pharmaceutical chemist Radford(Eric Mabius)or else hitch a ride with someone else. This shortly after they leave a diner with various people having lunch. Gretchen, who has a kind heart, decides she'll give Trip a lift back to the diner so that his cell phone can gain a signal. Cookie(Arielle Kebbel)has a bladder problem and needs to urinate before their trip back to the diner. On their way back, Cookie notices a turned over SUV which looks similar to the one they are riding in. When arriving back to the diner(..and a little motel nearby), the group notice no one around. It's certainly suspicious because they had just left from there with plenty of people inside. Patrolling the grounds, the group begin to fall one by one to a mysterious hooded figure with a type of gas mask covering his ghoulish face who, before appearing, introduces himself with a foul stench as he arrives from this type of gaseous cloud..could he perhaps represent "death"? Other members of the group include blind Jack(Devon Gummersall)with an abundance of witty liners, often poking fun at his handicap and Nelson(Derek Richardson),a turntable musician who has a gig lined up at the rave. In a peculiar group of circumstances, Radford emerges, and disappears, all throughout the characters' terrifying ordeal..what's his part in the grand scheme of things?

Another one of those gory "characters running from death" horror flicks, this actually has some entertaining moments. The characters are interesting and funny..quite likable and nowhere near as obnoxious and annoying as these type of flicks often litter us with. Surprisingly, several gore scenes show body parts removed from unfortunate souls..one poor fellow was stuck in a garbage bin with his entire lower body removed! I'm not sure how I take the twist at the end..it's awfully derivative of other films of it's ilk(..such as "Final Destination"). But, the flick sure is strange enough, with an unusual killer with unique abilities and arrives differently than the usual grim reapers this evil one clearly emulates.

Michael Ironside has a small role as Henry, this awkwardly behaving man looking for his missing wife who Trip encounters when running from Radford, often clutching his side as if he could keel over any minute.

Worst movie I've seen in quite a while..

[Oxwall · 1/10 · 20 December 2006]

This movie is about some sort of 'ghost' who whispers through the night, moves in shadow-like steps and kill a bounce of teenagers who has managed to get stranded on a desert hotel. Now, at the final moment of the film you reach a point where you get to learn a bit more about the true art of metaphorical events. Now, this concluded, I still don't like this film. As I see it, only a - big - waste of time! The actors where mediocre, nothing to put in the Christmas tree, but not totally ashame. The worst thing is the oh-so-played-out clichés appearing over and over, scenes and moves that perhaps just need to be there to make a classical horror flick. However, I can't see any good idea why people should see this, at least not something to ease back to if you're with a girl ;)

Give these guys cash!

[edgent · 10/10 · 16 March 2006]

I went to see the movie knowing it was a low budget movie and probably more of the same to boot, thinking it'd be bad goreish effects and ready to be bored. Actually committed to hate the movie.

But something happened. The movie's twisted sense of humor, as you can experience in the first minutes, gets you into watching the movie just to see what silly thing happens next, along with its jumpy moments, and typical bad guys and the so predictable deaths everyone knows (the proverbial closed door leading to a dark room that everyone seems to step into... or not:); but hey, it's still lightweight fun! Then the movie's final twist is revealed and all the silly things make sense, shifting the what you thought it was bland predictable stuff into something else you didn't really notice because you were having fun poking at the holes of the movie and its apparently predictable stuff.

The movie ends, people in the theater have stopped laughing and are silent in amazement, and my friend slowly says this weekend he's not going to the desert... just in case.

Follow your nose, this one's not bad at all

[MovieMaddis · 6/10 · 17 April 2006]

Head towards this smell. Really not bad at all given a relatively low budget and mostly unknowns in the lead. Here is a movie that rests its strengths on the very essentials of a good horror movie: scares, creepy atmosphere, and a little humor to ease the tension. The plot is ho-hum with a group of college students making their way across the desert and somehow stranded at a diner. The stalking of an unknown creature begins and they are picked off one by one in various gore filled scenarios. The added intelligence of this movie is that it keeps you guessing almost to the end what is going on. When the twist is finally revealed we are left a little unsatisfied, but like a good roller coaster, the ride was enjoyable even if the scenery was a bit bland.

Many have compared this to Dead End, which in my opinion was horribly drab. Reeker is far superior and if any comparisons should be made it should be to Haute Tension.

This team could certainly do better and will inspire a lot of fanfare for the next go around. But all in all, this Reeker was well worth the time.

Maddis 6/10

Better than expected.....

[neal2zod · 5/10 · 22 March 2005]

I caught this one at SXSW 2005 - and was ready to hate it, mainly b/c of the ridiculous fanboy hype outside the theatre.

Yes, it's possible for a movie that nobody's heard of to have too much hype - it seems almost every low-budget horror movie these days has so much rabid fanaticism from the aintitcoolnews crowd, that all these movies tend to be decent but over-hyped (see Ginger Snaps, SAW), or just plain awful (see Jeepers Creepers, Dog Soldiers, Cabin Fever, or better yet, don't). The only one of these movies that lives up to the hype is the still-under-seen classic May.

While Reeker doesn't come close to the emotional punch of May, it's an entirely adequate schlock-horror movie that doesn't take itself too seriously, yet doesn't wink-and-nudge enough to ruin the material.

The less said about the plot, the better - it's essentially the same "college kids vs. monster" movie we've been seeing since Friday the 13th, but with the gimmick that the killer lets off a noxious odor before it strikes. (hence the somewhat juvenile title) And one of the kids is blind, so he can smell the killer better than the other kids. I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried. Don't worry, though - there's a twist in the end that makes it all come together, believe it or not - try to stay away from spoilers if you can.

Probably doesn't sound too great so far, but there's some big, big laughs, a few decent scares, a cameo by Michael Ironside, and quite possibly the first and last use of Cutting Crew's 80s hit "I just died in your arms tonight" in a film. All in all, it's a fun movie to catch on cable or as a cheap rental.

Oh, the end credits contain a pre-emptive rant against critics who will title their reviews of this film "It Reeks/stinks!", and the scratch and sniff promo cards say on the back "If you're a p***y - stay at home". It's that type of movie.

What the hell??????

[MCEdwards13 · 5/10 · 5 December 2006]

I took a wild guess on this film to be honest.... front cover looked good, the synopsis on the back made the film sound good, but when push came to shove, it was just "alright". The characters were drab and boring and very cliché "horror teen victims", the script was quite funny with a few comedy moments and one-liners and on first impressions the storyline seemed very much "done before a million and one times". Reeker has its fair share of slight frights (if you're a girl), funny moments and half-decent gore special fx, but the twist at the end? What the hell? As much as it sort of tied the story together, it also left me thinking "OK, but.... why?" I think it tries to be too clever and whacky, and fails! An OK "no-brainer" to watch with a four pack and a takeaway, but please don't expect a genius horror film... you'll be disappointed!