Bone Tomahawk

I think that, when it comes to film quality, there has never been a better horror movie with aboriginal cannibals. A week ago I complained that in Roth's Green Inferno hardly anything happens for half of the film. Here, the proportion between “introduction” and “action” is even more sober, but it doesn’t matter at all when you can see the difference in talent between Roth and the first-time director S. Craig Zahler. Ninety minutes are dedicated to introducing characters stubbornly determined to rescue the abducted inhabitants of a village. That’s enough time to sincerely start rooting for them, which also helped by the superb performances. The extremely brutal final half-hour then feels like a sucker punch, because the tribe of cannibals don’t fool around. It is very clear for everyone that these nice characters have walked into a place where they should have never been at all. I never imagined that the horror genre could blend so smoothly with the western. But Bone Tomahawk is both a really good western and really good horror. Very close to perfection. (25/10/2015)

It’s nice to come across a genre film that takes its time, lets the shots fade out and, instead of quickly satisfying viewers, slowly builds the atmosphere and the depiction of the characters. Thanks also to the patient and precise work with the mise-en-scène and the old-school linear narrative, it’s easy in the first hour to fall under the impression that you’re watching a classic western. In fact, Bone Tomahawk is a post-classic western combined with a cannibal horror movie (at the same time, the second half of the film can be seen as a subverted variation on hixploitation). Conducting themselves with the straightforwardness of cowboys, the men, one of whom is a cripple and the other a purblind widower, are branded as idiots by the self-sufficient female protagonist, while the ignorant attitude towards native culture has bloody consequences, and the theory of the frontier (between wilderness and civilisation) is not only taken to hellish extremes, but can also be related to the genre bipolarity of the film, which quite thought-provokingly explores the overlaps of horror movies and westerns (fear of strangers, the arrogance of the powerful white man). Though the ending doesn’t provide the satisfaction that I would have expected based on the care taken in the preceding two hours, Bone Tomahawk is still, together with The Hateful Eight, the best western updated for the troubled times in which we live, and by drawing from the exploitation tradition, it is far wittier and honest than The Revenant. (22/10/2017)

Bone Tomahawk is broadly discussed and written about as a horror movie in a western setting or, conversely, a western that turns into a horror movie at the climax. This is a one-dimensional view, however, as S. Craig Zahler created an inventive revisionist western in his exceptionally polished debut. The new concept in his interpretation does not mean dirt, nihilism and rejection of heroism, which deconstructionist films like Unforgiven fall back on by default. Zahler brings forth a much more inventive, well-developed and original grasp of the iconic genre. The masterfully written film re-establishes the western for today’s cynical and enlightened times in that it conceives its iconic attributes with a sophisticated perspective, while concurrently updating its basic narrative formulas and ethos. Therefore, the Indians here are not savages, but rather in the figure of a professor they become a biting personification of the wrongs committed by white men, which goes beyond the cowboys not only in being familiar with nature and its wonders, but also with the breadth of knowledge, wit and intelligence. Similarly, the protagonist’s wife can be sarcastic, rational and intelligent, while adhering to the role of object and trophy. Heroism inevitably becomes synonymous with limitations, ignorance and stubbornness. The film’s most essential roles are played by troglodytes as anonymous monsters who defy rationality, returning danger, mystery and, mainly, an element of the strange to life on the edge of civilisation. Those are the ideal erratic, bestial savages like the Indians in the tales of the Wild West, before their traditional depiction took on the foul taste of genocide. As a result, Bone Tomahawk can place in the main female character’s mouth a memorable and eloquent line that provides scathing commentary on the machismo of the film’s men and, at the same time, serves as a heroic celebration of their tenacity and determination. (11/07/2016)

A garbage story filmed at a meandering, and therefore boring, pace that doesn't bother with logic and heads towards a dumb ending. The brutal opening and the first 20 minutes or so look very promising and seem to set up an atmospheric, gritty film that deviates from established norms. However, from the robbery and kidnapping in the deserted town onwards, it starts losing its grip and relentlessly gets worse and worse. The peculiar anachronistic dialogues are more of a nuisance as if Zahler was lightly inspired by Tarantino. The biggest mystery to me is why I still gave it two stars when I genuinely suffered in the second half. Maybe I was influenced by those enthusiastic comments and high ratings from my favorites. Well, we'll meet again and when I remove it from my memory slowly and painfully, they will explain to me what the cleverness and entertainment of the film consisted of. Overall impression: 30%. I remember a cannibal western that, in my opinion, reliably outperformed Zahler. That film was Ravenous from 1999, even though Bird wasn't a leading directorial figure. (05/04/2021)

Rough, raw, brutal and uncompromising and yet based mainly on the characters. And what will disappoint you even more is the unstyled and rushed ending, which lacks a proper finale and which turns away from those characters. The ending is simply too brief and quick considering how slow was in the first three quarters. (17/12/2015)