SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Cassandra Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

schrijvermarcel Nerve wrecking, brutal, suspenseful (and sometimes gory) western/horror with great acting, fantastic cinematography and occasionally hilarious dialogue. Amazing film, highly recommended.

Bram Veneman It's a slow paced movie for sure, but it doesn't suffer for it. Basically, if you like 2 hour westerns, this is a thing for you. There are many subtleties in this movie that fans of "the hills have eyes" will usually not appreciate (reading from the comments).

jadavix After watching "Bone Tomahawk" and the more recent "Brawl in Cell Block 99" back-to-back, I have come to the conclusion that S. Craig Zahler's films are like Quentin Tarantino's output, minus the chatter. This would seem to be a good thing, but this absence of boring dialogue actually serves to illustrate its purpose: it provides the illusion of content. Zahler's films are baggy and empty and tedious, but unlike Tarantino's, they don't occupy you for most of their runtime. From Tarantino, you turn away exhausted. From Zahler, you turn away, merely bored.Zahler is like Tarantino in other ways. For one thing, his films bring in a tonne of capable actors and character actors. Incredibly, "Bone Tomahawk" was Zahler's first movie in the director's chair, and yet the cast is amazing. There's Kurt Russell (also a Tarantino fave), Sid Haig (an even bigger Tarantino fave), David Arquette, Sean Young, Richard Jenkins, Michael Parè, Fred Melamed (you know the face, if not the name). But most impressive of all: the legendary character actor, in his eighties here, and appearing in what will probably be his last ever role... James Tolkan. Not even Tarantino could get him! (Maybe Tolkan thinks he's a slacker? Doubtful).None of these fine and recognizable actors were really necessary, I don't think. This is hardly an actor's picture; they seem dwarfed by the sets and locations and too-long run time, which, weirdly, is the exact same length as "Brawl in Cell Block 99". Did Zahler do that on purpose?It feels like nothing happens for the majority of both of these movies. They're uninvolving and fail to generate any tension or interest. This is a brutal horror movie/western, but it doesn't even try to be scary or suspenseful. Again, like "Brawl", there are some fairly violent moments early in the movie to whet the appetite for the extraordinary gore you get at the end. We're talking scalpings, decapitations, and longitudinal bisection. (In "Brawl", it was mostly head-stompings leading to face and head-loss).That is, essentially, what Zahler's two movies are about: violence. So why does he make us wait so long to witness it?

OneEightNine Media I think it was someone on ScreenJunkies who recommended this but yeah; I wish I never watched it. Simply because it is a below average film. The director and budget are to blame. It is not even worth watching just for the action. The Blu-Ray cover is more entertaining than the actual film. This is a three point seven kind of deal but I'm giving it a one out of ten because it cost me 2 hours of my life I'll never get back.