No Man's Land: The Rise of Reeker

Having caught this at a screening, I can say that No Man's Land is kind of a prequel to Reeker. It gives some insight into the birth of the Reeker. As you might imagine, it's pretty twisted. Once again, Dave Payne serves up a killer opening sequence (pun intended) and the effects are pretty cool and creative, especially considering this is an indie.

If you enjoyed the first Reeker, you should like this one, too. Yeah, we have a group of people who will get picked off one by one, but that's to be expected in the genre. And hey - by now we know one thing the Reeker definitely does not do - and that's babysit. The trick in horror is to keep us guessing, which No Man's Land does and also manages some original kills in the process.

Reeker is back with his tool kit and the prequel retains the same tongue-in-cheek humor as the first, with some choice dialog and gory silliness. (Watch out for further cranial exploitation and the best bird fly-by on screen to date!) Desmond Askew (Turistas) stands out as the inept Binky and it's good to see veteran Robert Pine as the local Sheriff. All in all a fun, schlocky addition to the franchise.

In case anyone doesn't know, this movie is in fact a sequel (the first simply called 'Reeker'), and this time it follows the plot, well...almost identical to the first one.

This is a major problem.

In the original film there is a rather large twist at the end, and if you don't already guess it, it is a great twist. This film follows the exact same twist, so if you've seen the first, then there's not much to see here. It's basically a remake, with slightly different circumstances.

On a plus point, the baddie does have a little bit of background, unlike in the first movie, but that really is the only plus point.

In my opinion, this is a sequel to a film that didn't need a sequel, so again, if you have seen the first film this might be a little boring to watch.

On the other hand, if you haven't seen the first film you might just enjoy it. Even though it is a sequel, it stands alone (as I said, it's more of a remake) and there is no need to have seen the first one.

so, if you saw the first it's 3/10

if you didn't see the first it's 6/10

So overall (and being generous) it's 5/10

In 1978, Sheriff Reed (David Stanbra) captures the deranged serial killer known as The Death Valley Drifter (Michael Robert Brandon) in the desert and the criminal is sentenced to death. On the present days, Sheriff Reed (Robert Pine) is near the retirement and will be replaced by his son; while they are having a meal in a diner in a rest stop in the middle of the desert, a runaway car with three thieves of a casino stops in the spot for refueling. One of the robbers is the former boyfriend of the waitress Maya (Mircea Monroe) and another criminal is wounded in the backseat. There is a shootout among the thieves and the sheriffs and their car explodes. However, the body of the wounded criminal vanishes and the survivors discover that they are stranded in the place; further they are stalked and chased by a fiend with stench known as The Reeker.

"Reeker" is a good low budget horror movie that in some moments recall "Identity" and "Jacob's Ladder" and with a great surprising conclusion. Unfortunately this supposed sequel in nothing more than a messy and unoriginal remake, using the same storyline in a different situation associated to a confused and boring screenplay; better off watching the original good movie again. My vote is four.

Title (Brazil): "Pânico no Deserto 2" ("Panic in the Desert 2")

I have fond memories of watching the original "Reeker" back in 2005. It was at the Belgian Festival of Fantastic Films and practically the entire theater went wild with enjoyment. Surely the premise was derivative and the wholesome was overall forgettable, but at least it was a totally unpretentious new horror film with neat gore effects, fresh acting performances and a really cool killer character (a smelly grim reaper like serial killer). Nothing more, nothing less. The release of sequel within a couple of years was inevitable, but let it be understood that it wasn't unwelcome at all. In a fair period of three years, writer/director Dave Payne came up with a follow-up that is at least equally entertaining, exciting and fast-paced as the first. Obviously the surprise element has vanished – although even the original wasn't *that* surprising – but Payne inventively compensates this through adding a background to the killer, even more black humor and barbaric gross-out effects. The main difference with "Reeker" is that the characters become conscious of the situation they're in relatively quick and actually attempt to make it out of there. Whether some of them succeed or not is what keeps the film reasonably suspenseful. "No Man's Land" opens bizarrely, in the year 1978, with the arrest and execution of a serial killer known as the Death Valley Drifter. He doesn't even bother to resist because the voices in his sick head keep telling him that his work on earth is done and a much bigger errand awaits him. Jumping forward to present time in the same desert, where a retiring Sheriff and his estranged deputy son literally bump into a couple of fugitive casino robbers. Subsequent to some gunfire and a car explosion, the posse find themselves isolated and abandoned in the desert, with a heavily stinking and vigorous "shape" chasing them. In this type of films, when you already know from beforehand what the major twist will be, it's still a lot of fun to pay close attention and fit all pieces of the puzzle together yourself. The script of "Rise of the Reeker" leaves plentiful of clues for alert viewers, but offers even more exhilaration and bloodshed for undemanding horror fanatics. Good performances, particularly from Michael Robert Brandon and the beautiful Valerie Cruz, surefooted direction and a marvelously depressing setting as well. Overall a much recommended film to fans of the genre.

The other reviewers have pointed to this being a 'kind of/sort of' prequel to "Reeker", which I did not see. The other reviewers also said that if you saw "Reeker" then "No Man's Land" will be kind of a letdown.

Without having seen the 'Main Event', I think I agree. But if this is your First view, then by all means, it will be entertaining.

Without giving away any plot-- a assemblage of characters, including the obligatory 'Fleeing criminals' are holed up at an isolated desert gas station/motel to find they are trapped and being stalked by something Hideous.

Starts as a simple, time-worn horror/slasher premise, which can prove to be limp and boring except for either creative laughs or extra buckets of splatter. You know-- a "Jason" in the Desert sort of thing.

Except-- this movie takes a vague left turn. It isn't about the Splatter-- though there is a bit of that. It's about some strange, unexplained supernatural rules: Rules that must be adhered to. . .or enforced.

Think about it that way as you watch and begin to scratch your head-- then when the end comes, it will all try to snap together. Yeah-- with gaps and loose pieces, but still. That's why I gave it a 7. That plus the notion of a 'Reeker' as a supernatural creature seemed more corny than scary at first glance-- so you think it will be cornball fun and yucks might be disappointed when it doesn't deliver.

Instead, I came away from this movie thinking of an episode out of Neil Gaiman's Sandman universe. So to me, this movie was more Supernatural Thriller than Horror. Not the BEST-- but nicely entertaining. Give it a try.