Customer Reviews

No Man's Land: The Rise of Reeker

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Writer/director Dave Payne remakes his own earlier flick Reeker with No Man's Land: Rise of Reeker, brought to DVD under the newly-minted Ghost House Underground label. If you've already seen Reeker, there is nothing here with No Man's Land that will surprise you in the least. That being said, if you haven't, you'll find No Man's Land a surprisingly good and enjoyable horror flick that delivers the goods. The storyline revolves around a serial killer being put to death, claiming that his crimes were practice for his work in the next life. Turns out he wasn't kidding, when years later a group of strangers in the desert find themselves hunted down by a murderous, demonic force. To make matters worse, stranger things are occuring that you just have to see to believe. There is a certain degree of campiness to No Man's Land to be sure, but for its running time, this flick manages to satisfy in terms of gore, and even some laugh loud moments to boot. There's a delicious twist to be seen as well that is actually kind of inventive, but as said before, if you've seen the original Reeker, it won't be anything to come as a surprise. All in all, No Man's Land: Rise of Reeker is one of the gems of the Ghost House Underground lineup, and is worth seeing whether you enjoyed the old Reeker movie or are new to Dave Payne's creation.

No Man's Land: The Rise of Reeker is one of the more infuriatingly bad films in the increasingly dubious Ghost House Underground Eight Film Collection. Things start off quite promisingly with a great little murder scene, but I wanted to hit something by the time the end credits rolled. Apparently, this is a sequel to another Dave Payne film called Reeker, which I haven't seen. All I know about the earlier film is that it can't possibly be as bad as this one. Writer/director Dave Payne basically gives the audience the middle finger with his awful ending to a film that was already devoid of all logic and continuity and weighted down with the most overdone and annoying of story and character clichés. I feel I'm being quite generous indeed in giving this film two stars.

Sheriff McAllister (Robert Pine) made his reputation by capturing the infamous Death Valley Drifter back in 1978 (in truth, he ran like a little girl while the killer basically arrested himself, but our "hero" chose not to disclose the true nature of the incident), and now he's turning over the sheriffing reins to his estranged son Harris (Michael Muhney). On his very last day, a trio of bank robbers come through his quiet little town in the middle of nowhere and stir up all kinds of trouble, including the return of "something else" that used to be the Death Valley Drifter (despite the fact this killer paid the ultimate price for his crimes long, long ago). Wouldn't you just know it? One of the bank robbers just so happened to have a relationship with a waitress at the little hole-in-the-wall restaurant that serves as the epicenter of the story - so, yes, we not only have the tired old father and son finally trying to get to know one another plot line, we are also treated to the dynamic of past lovers being forced back together in a crisis. From this, we somehow make the huge and unexplained leap to a soul-catcher of Indian legend terrorizing the whole community (which seems to consist of about seven people). The whole thing really jumps the shark when an invisible barrier enclosing the whole area is discovered - but the ridiculous plot twists don't stop there. As the story skips and jumps along, we're treated to random moments of utterly inane dialogue and increasingly unbelievable plot developments. I actually re-watched a five-minute segment toward the end thinking I must have dozed off at some point, but the problem turned out to be one completely of the writer/director's making and not a temporary loss of consciousness on my part. Now, in retrospect, I can only wish I had actually slept through some or all of this shipwreck of a movie.

Writer/director Dave Payne was apparently never quite sure just what kind of film he was making. It's horror for the most part, but the story also wanders off the plantation periodically to muddle its way through drama and black comedy. Any thoughts of taking the film even remotely seriously are dashed as soon as one character takes to wearing a garbage bag over his head. The acting also leaves much to be desired, with even familiar character actor Robert Pine turning in a rather pedestrian performance.

There are some decent titles in the Ghost House Underground Eight Film Collection (Dance of the Dead is the best of the bunch, but I also rather liked Room 205 and found The Substitute interesting), but No Man's Land is not one of them. There are just far too many problems with the whole production to make this a film worth seeing.

I enjoyed No Man's Land (Rise Of The Reeker).
It had just enough humor and camp value,the story was very out there but interesting.The smell of death greeting you before you meet your demise.
The gore effects were done brilliantly and quite abundantly.There were only a couple of parts that left me scratching my head but the rest was fun slasher/scifi entertainment that I know I will watch again,so I bought the movie.
There are two really hot guys and two attractive ladies so everyone should be pleased with the scenery.I don't know why so many people are dogging this movie out.This is somewhat of a prequel to Reeker which I quite liked as well.If you want to see a good gory movie with a very different kind of killer watch this.

So, there is a point in "No Man's Land: The Rise of Reeker," where these two guys who have robbed a casino are walking through the desert and the one carrying the briefcase with the stolen money in it suddenly drops it because the briefcase has gotten hot. He opens it and discovers the money is on fair and despite (or because) he literally has half a brain at this point, he decides the only sane thing to do is to have the too of them urinate on the money. At that point I got the uneasy feeling that I was supposed to me finding more humor in the film than I had so far. But by the time I got to the end credits I was more concerned with trying to make complete sense of the rules of the games. Too many times movies are slowed down by someone spinning out the requisite exposition, but this film has the opposite problem.

I understand now that "No Man's Land: The Rise of Reeker" is a sequel, with a prequel, to "Reeker," both of which are directed by Dave Payne. I cannot tell if not having seen the original helps or hinders my watching of this second film in what may well become a series. Ultimately, the best way I can describe this movie is to say that it is a Frankenstein-like collection of bits and pieces. Remember the Horrorfest trailers that have clips from all of the movies in the series? "No Man's Land" has that sense of bringing together disparite horror film elements and forcing them into a messy amalgamation. The movie starts off pretty well with an encounter thirty years ago between a travelling salesman and a hitchhiker in the middle of Death Valley. This is where we meet the Reeker, or I should say the guy who becomes the Reeker or a Reeker (I am not sure which). Death is apparently a gateway to whatever the hell is happening in this film. I am sure that Payne's bizzare little world here makes perfect sense to him, but it never did come together for me. It was close, but this film did not quite make it to the point where I had to figure out whether to round up or down.

Whether by commission or omission, the Ghost House Underground series is obviously a step below Lionsgate's Horrorfest lineup. Those at least were movies that ended up being screened in theaters, although ostensibly they were too gory, cutting edge, or whatever for theatrical distribution (a claim that really applied only to last year's "Frontier(s)," which was dropped from the Horrorfest lineup because of its NC-17 rating). Apparently the GHU series consists of films never intended to be more than direct to video offerings. I went to Horrorfest two years ago, but last year it did not come to the Zenith City and this fall's offering has been moved back to next year (they only have five films to die for at this point of the eight promised for January). So I figured checking out theses GHU films was better than nothing this October, a month when horror films are supposed to rule the roost. I organized the eight films in my queue according to what their ratings were at Netflix, and "No Man's Land: The Rise of Reeker" was essentially in a three-way tie for the second best movie in the series ("Dance of the Dead" appears to be the best of the bunch by this standard). But since this is a below average film by my reckoning, I am pessimistic regarding the overall strength of the series. We shall see, hopefully between now and Halloween.

The movie was suppose to take place in a demention between life and death????? What ever that means. Stupid. The acting is not very good and I didn't understand who or what the killer was. The effects were ok. the only real gru-sum part for me was at the very start of the movie with the hitchiker scene. That is why it gets two stars other wise I would give it just one. Don't waste your money.

one thing about the movie that none of the other reviewers has mentioned is that it stars the very pretty young actress mircea monroe. having a sexy female lead vastly improves any horror movie and that goes double for this one. i watched the movie twice, the second time to check out mircea monroe again. on second viewing i did come to understand the dopey plot. not that it matters much. still, this is a very solid redbox rental. if only for mircea monroe and a few gore inspired laughs.

I was never much of a horror fan until I saw REEKER. When I got my pants back from the cleaners I rushed out looking for NO MAN'S LAND--well, it's back to the cleaners. Laughing while being scared is a powerful combination.

Believe K Dwaynes review. This movie is about the origins of the putrid smelling apparition called "The Reeker". The original movie was pretty bad but this one makes the first one look like a masterpiece.

There is not one character you care about and hope they meet the reeker soon but it's not to be. Included in this list of cyphers is an incompetent retiring sheriff, his idiot of a deputy who is also his estranged son. Sonny boy couldn't make it as a policeman in the big city so daddy pulled some strings and got him a job in the middle of nowhere.

The story takes place at a greasy spoon diner next to a seedy motel that makes the bates motel look like the Hilton. Included in the plot are three stupid bank robbers-the waitress girlfriend of one of the robbers and a woman doctor.

Oh and the reeker somehow forms an invisible wall around this location trapping everyone and when one of the bank robbers tries to make his escape his car runs into the invisible wall and he loses half his skull exposing his brain. He survives but his friend thinks he looks gross so he makes him wear a garbage bag on his head. They would have done better if they had put this film in the garbage bag.

Bad movie bad, bad and beware any reviews over one star.

Now, I'm no high brow sophisticated Roger Ebert wannabe. I LOVE my cheezy low budgie horror flicks. And if it has zombies in it, all the better. But THIS is a complete waste of valuable viewing time. Even under the most desperate circumstances give this one a wide berth.
It's starts off promising enough, with a nice little fake out of who the killer really is. The killer is tracked back to his isolated shack by a cowardly patrolman, who in true Barney Fife like style, bumbles his gun and drops it, only capturing the killer because an unseen apparition he had been talking to told him so. Right off, the bad acting and utter amateurish stupidity of the patrolman, a character I though we left behind in this genre long ago, drags the picture down.
Cut to 25 years later, it's the last day of the now Sheriff, and in true bad exposition, on-the-nose dialogue, is turning over the reins to his son. For a movie that's supposed to be about a killing machine, it gets waaaay off track with bad relationship subplots (we have the robbers on the run, one of them being being in a relationship with the waitress; the father/son antagonism; the bickering robbers) and sidestories that add 1. nothing to the story and 2. detract from the premise adding not an ounce of tension or suspense.
This is just plain BAD and amateurish filmmaking from the acting to the lame lack of narrative coherence and complete absence of logic (the sherriff lets one robber just take off in car with gun, while the other unarmed, nonviolent one is held). Somehow the writer/director thought if he strung together a bunch of what he considers to be interesting, amusing/disgusting (the robber boyfriend has to go key diving in a cesspool) scenes, that it would keep the audience entertained and add up to something at the end. It's clear within the first 20 minutes it doesn't.
These other two reviewers HAVE to be shills to give this turd five stars or they've never seen a decent horror flick in their life.

I saw this film at a private outdoor screening and was blown away. Dave has done it again and people have noticed. This film is much bigger than it's previous release REEKER and explains a lot about the back story of the REEKER is, but stands alone quite well.