Watch Reeker For Free

Very best movie i ever watch

Please don't spend money on this.

Good concept, poorly executed.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

REEKER is a typical monster-horror flick with one crucial difference: it has a twist that throws the entire story on its head. There's only one problem: the twist isn't original. In fact, it seems heavily derivative of IDENTITY, and that's the reason I didn't enjoy it much. It's not bad, sure, but it raises more questions than it answers and I think the film would have been just as effective without it.Anyway, aside from that, this is horror by numbers. Kudos to the filmmakers for opening their movie with a HIGHLY effective scare sequence: a family drive off road and the dog and husband disappear. The wife goes out to find the dog maimed – and then she turns around and her husband is standing there with half his head missing. Some truly disgusting CGI effects animate this shock scene and it's undoubtedly the best in the movie.From then on we're in predictable territory and it seems to take an age for the scenario to be set up properly. The youths are stranded, separated, and finally stalked and killed by an unseen killer. The killer's identity is pretty odd and I did enjoy the idea of its smell, and when finally revealed it is a frightening beastie. But other bits, like the drill coming out from under the bed, made me laugh instead of shriek. There isn't a great deal of gore on offer but the script is a cut above the usual fare. There are also a couple of good characters among the assortment: Tina Illman is perfect as the feisty South African heroine and Devon Gummersall acts well as the blind guy. Derek Richardson pretty much recreates his character from HOSTEL but Arielle Kebbel and Scott Whyte are pretty poor playing clichéd stoners. I personally appreciated the fact that genre veteran Michael Ironside turns up for a cameo appearance because I always get a kick out of seeing him on screen, even though he doesn't get to do much here other than act scared and shady.REEKER could have been better but I was a bit disappointed that it's so slowly paced. I appreciate that a lot of that time is spent on the build-up of atmosphere but really, more incident and less scene-setting would have been better. The movie lasts for an hour and a half but it easily feels like two hours because so little happens in the first half. In future when I see a good scare in the opening scene of a film, I'll be cautious and aware that this might mean there isn't much else happening for a little while.

'Reeker' doesn't start well. A family are driving down a desert highway, and the little boy is so nauseating, the viewer is instantly longing for him to come to a sticky end. Sadly, while his mother and father (and dog) are duly despatched after hitting a deer with the family car, the little angel's demise is unrecorded.After the opening credits, we meet 'a group of young friends': Trip takes drugs, Jack is blind, Cookie is naive, Gretchen sounds English (but could be Australian or Swedish, her pals speculate) and Nelson fancies Cookie. Trip is being stalked by Radford, his dealer. The acting isn't always stellar, and as the storyline unfolds, it is so foggy it is open to interpretation. And yet, I really, really like this film (and its subsequent prequel, filmed in 2008). There is a genuine sense that the isolated desert, the motel in which (and around) the group stay, in fact their whole world, is removed from reality and doesn't adhere to any rules. The shocks pile up until it becomes clear that, to use a cliché, anything can happen. A truly creepy and unfathomable atmosphere is created.As glimpses of the original family (and the deer!) that are scattered throughout the story hint, the characters all appear to have died, although this is never made explicit (other than a rumbling, earthquake effect signifying the fatal crash of their camper van as they pass from life into death without knowing it). In this limbo state, Reeker comes for them. Drenched in a shimmering effect, the creature otherwise goes through typical slasher/killer motions, but because events around him/it exist in a 'heightened reality', Reeker's appearance takes on an extra dimensional, unearthly quality (the foul stench of death signals his arrival, hence his name). As Reeker claims his victims, they assume similar fates to when they died originally. This is my interpretation; I may be wrong, but it makes sense of events to me. Themes are confounding, but very much worth investing in.The set-pieces encompassing each (secondary) death are by turns stunning, gross, horrific and hilarious. And always bizarre.In the end, only Gretchen and Jack survive their meeting with Reeker. As they are driven away by the police, they see their camper van on its side, the remains of their friends' bodies scattered around it. Despite the creature's attempts to kill them, they could not die because they didn't cry in the original crash. The film doesn't go out of its way to explain the true nature of Reeker, nor the unfortunate events that befall the luckless travellers; the tale is enigmatic, but well worth your time.

"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.

A stinking beast is coming to kill some college kids? I'm in!There was no doubt that I felt "Reeker" had some potential and the incredible twist ending really showed it. However, there were too many failures during the rest of the film to make the movie that worthwhile. For example, the characters don't really have much going for them. Putting aside that most of them look too old to play the age they are suppose to be playing, none of them really had much character to them and I pretty much, after watching the film, can only remember them by their hair color, gender and, maybe, their name. During the film's running length, not much is done to really feather out or develop these characters and it didn't help things that the actors portraying them didn't look like they were putting much effort into them. With the exception of Scott Whyte as the annoying character Trip; he was giving his all to make sure you hated him every second of the film.Additionally, the film has no real scares to speak of and director Dave Payne did nothing to build tension or even have a creepy atmosphere in the film. Everything you see is one giant cliché in the genre of horror and this becomes even more evident with the lackluster design of the film's antagonist. While Stank Beast works as a metaphor for the film's ending and its stinky attributes has some major play during the twist, the generic look they gave the creature and the fact it looked like the characters were smelling a dirty litter box rather than a horrid monster ready to claim their mortality didn't help sell the film and ended up making me laugh rather than shiver in fear."Reeker" had some potential and I genuinely though the ending was decent but the film suffered from a weak tone, an antagonist that was hard to take seriously, forgettable acting and characters, and not a single scare in sight.Hi! My name is Rev. Ron and I love movies! So much so that I write a blog where I review whatever film I am currently watching. You can read a more in-depth review of this film (and others) at revronmovies.blogspot.com.