No… no… no… Why must we spoil a completely enjoyable slasher film, with an ending that ties everything up so completely? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for tying up loose ends, but when the entire merit of the resolution lies on a closing sequence that is identical to another film, which is only a few years old, any credibility writer/director Dave Payne may have established is completely discarded. The slasher film, as a genre, is inherently derivative of other similar films, but when the line between being derivative and downright stealing is crossed, that marks the point of no return. I only wish I'd seen that line being crossed just a little sooner.

After their car runs out of gas at an abandoned motel, on a barren stretch of deserted highway, a group of friends find themselves terrorized by a killer that smells like death. That about sums it up. Did I mention there's also a demented drug dealer following them in an attempt to get back some stolen ecstasy? I didn't? That's probably because that entire subplot is of no consequence to the overall story, and serves only to provide a resolution to the film's events. I would have been fine with that, as the film works quite well as a low budget slasher, but the ending completely disestablished any appreciation I had for the film's by-the-books approach.

I will forewarn you – I was expecting very little from Reeker, as the first two minutes would lead you to believe it is going to be a very amateurish production. The opening sequence is completely devoid of logic, and shows almost no promise for the rest of the film, as both the acting and dialogue are atrocious. The film does rise above this opening sequence however, and provides the viewer with some genuine shocks, a reasonable amount of gore, and some genuinely funny dialogue. Surprisingly, the film does end up being very enjoyable.

The killer is some sort of decaying creature, always preceded by an overpowering smell of death, and dispatches the group in some rather gruesome ways. The killer is apparently human, at least somewhat, and roams around in a haze of stench, while wearing a dark cloak and a sort of gas mask. It actually looks quite impressive and is one of the films strongest aspects. The fact that it is hidden from the viewer for the better part of the running time is certainly to the films credit.

Forgive me if I can't get off the ending, but I am aggravated when an enjoyable film is destroyed by such an astounding level of unoriginality. Not only is it stolen from another film, but director Dave Payne reinserts a number of scenes throughout the final sequence, in order to completely fill in the gaps for an audience he must consider to be completely witless and thick-headed. He believes he's crafted something completely clever, and is uncertain whether we, as an audience, would be able to piece it all together. There is certainly something to be said for leaving a small amount of material open to interpretation or rediscovery during a second viewing.

There is some enjoyment to be had within Reeker, but anyone familiar with another certain film (I will not mention in this review, so as not to spoil the ending of another film which will ultimately turn up in review form, on Critical-Film) in which Reeker shares a certain end, will instantly notice the similarities. The ending was bad enough the first time around, it's certainly no better to close out a genuinely enjoyable horror film, such as Reeker.